Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 1, 2024 - The David Knight Show

03:01:32

The David Knight Show - 08/01/2024

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	you
	using free speech to free minds You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	As the clock strikes 13, it's Thursday, the first of August.
	Year of our Lord, 2024.
	Well, there were fireworks yesterday as Trump went to the National Association of Black Journalists, and ABC's Rachel Scott came out swinging at him, and he swung back.
	So we're going to begin with that, because it's kind of an interesting back and forth about it.
	But it's also some interesting discussions.
	Not that we really believe that the politicians are really going to do what they promise.
	But now we have another promise from Trump after saying he's going to get rid of taxes on tips.
	He talks about how Social Security is overtaxed.
	And there is something to talk about there.
	We're also going to talk about robot soldiers.
	Mark Milley, now cashing in on the big bucks, says that he thinks within 10 years it'll be 25 to 30 percent of the military will be robots.
	Well, that addresses the recruitment problems, doesn't it?
	But it creates problems for us.
	A standing army of robots.
	We'll be right back. Well, as I said, Trump went to the National Association of Black Journalists And it was a lot of fireworks.
	But of course, you've got to expect that.
	I mean, is there a National Association of White Journalists?
	They're just journalists.
	Make it about that. If you're going to make it about race, you've got to expect there's going to be questions about race.
	This is the way it began. It's not true.
	You have told four Congresswoman women of color, who were American citizens, to go back to where they came from.
	You have used words like animal and rabbit to describe black district attorneys.
	You've attacked black journalists, calling them a loser, saying the questions that they ask are, quote, stupid and racist.
	You've had dinner with a white supremacist at your Mar-a-Lago resort.
	So my question, sir, now that you are asking black supporters to vote for you, why should black voters trust you after you have used language like that?
	Well, first of all, I don't think I've ever been asked a question in such a horrible manner, a first question.
	You don't even say hello.
	Megan Kelly did it. Are you with ABC? Because I think they're a fake news network, a terrible network.
	And I think it's disgraceful that I came here in good spirit.
	I love the black population of this country.
	I've done so much for the black population of this country, including employment, including opportunity zones with Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina, which is one of the greatest programs ever for black workers and black entrepreneurs.
	I've done so much, and you know, and I say this, historically black colleges and universities were out of money, they were stone-cold broke, and I saved them, and I gave them long-term financing, and nobody else was doing it.
	I think it's a very rude introduction.
	I don't know exactly why you would do something like that, and let me go a step further.
	I was invited here, and I was told my opponent, whether it was Biden or Kamala, I was told my opponent was going to be here.
	It turned out my opponent isn't here.
	You invited me under false pretense.
	And then you said, you can't do it with Zoom.
	Well, you know, where's Zoom?
	She's going to do it with Zoom and she's not coming.
	And then you were half an hour late.
	Just so we understand, I have too much respect for you to be late.
	They couldn't get their equipment working or something was wrong.
	I think it's a very nasty question.
	I have answered the question.
	I have been the best...
	President for the black population since Abraham Lincoln.
	Better than President Johnson who signed the Voting Rights Act.
	For you to start off a question and answer period, especially when you're 35 minutes late because you couldn't get your equipment to work in such a hostile manner, I think it's a disgrace.
	Wow. Okay.
	Well, you went full Megyn Kelly on him.
	He says, I've never had anybody do anything this disgraceful.
	Well, it's Megyn Kelly. Now, Megyn Kelly is a full-blown sycophant cheerleader, grifter, cheering Trump on all the time.
	But, yeah, the things that she said there, you called a black prosecutor.
	An animal and rabbit.
	That's Letitia James.
	She is an animal. She is rabbit.
	She doesn't get a pass because of her skin color or because of her gender or whatever.
	She is one of the worst examples of weaponized lawfare.
	Look at what she has done, not just to Trump.
	To many, many organizations and individuals, the NRA, VDARE, regardless of what you think about VDARE, why should she be the one who decides that she's going to shut them down?
	Again, she is rabid, but that was ABC's Rachel Scott.
	It was interesting, I think, that he had a lot of allies that were there in the audience clapping him.
	You did hear some, ooh, when he said Kamala.
	It's supposed to be Kamala.
	The emphasis is on the wrong syllable.
	And you've got to correct that.
	Or that makes you racist as well, right?
	It's just a joke. You've got to use their pronouns, their pronunciation or whatever.
	Anyway, I don't know how that is really an insult.
	It's not like what George H.W. Bush used to do instead of calling Saddam, called him Sodom.
	So I think that was a deliberate insult he was making there.
	But again, that's the type of games that they play.
	And then he plays the race card himself, talking about DEI. Look, can we just agree that a rising tide lifts all boats?
	That's what JFK said, right?
	Why can't we just be Americans instead of all the adjectives?
	You know, we look at things like social justice.
	Folks, justice doesn't need an adjective.
	And if you put an adjective in front of it, you're talking about something other than justice as well.
	So he said he had too much respect for the conference to be late.
	He talked about how they had different rules.
	For Lala, then they did for him.
	She's allowed to do it with Zoom, but not him.
	Then he shows up and they make him wait for 35 minutes.
	He was counting, I'm sure.
	And then he goes one step further.
	He says, as part of this, I didn't know Lala was black.
	Do you believe that Vice President Kamala Harris is only on the ticket because she is a black woman?
	Well, I can say no. I think it's maybe a little bit different.
	So... I've known her a long time indirectly, not directly very much, and she was always of Indian heritage and she was only promoting Indian heritage.
	I didn't know she was black. Until a number of years ago when she happened to turn black and now she wants to be known as black.
	So I don't know, is she Indian or is she black?
	She is always identified as a black woman.
	I respect either one, but she obviously doesn't.
	Because she was Indian all the way and then all of a sudden she made a turn and she went...
	She became a black person.
	Just to be clear, sir, do you believe that she...
	I think somebody should look into that, too, when you ask, continue in a very hostile, nasty town.
	It's a direct question, sir.
	Do you believe that Vice President Kamala Harris is a DEI hire?
	I really don't know.
	I mean, I really don't know. Could be.
	Could be. There are some, and there are plenty.
	He says, maybe somebody should look into it.
	Well, people looked into it and started pulling up the archives.
	Okay, so what we're going to do today.
	Here's Indian Lala.
	Because you are Indian.
	Okay, and I don't know that everybody knows that, but I find that wherever I go and I see Indian people, the supermarket, on the street, everyone's like, you know, Kamala Harris is Indian, right?
	It's like our thing we're so excited about to have you running for president.
	Yeah. So, we're both Indian, but actually we're both South Indian.
	Yes. You look like the entire one half of my family.
	Okay, thank you. You do. I've been telling people we're related already, so this is perfect.
	It's basically true. And so, were you raised eating South Indian food?
	South Indian food. Oh yeah, South Indian food.
	That comes in handy when you need to fake a southern drawl, I guess, which she also did.
	And then there's this. I stand before you as the first candidate for vice president of the United States of South Asian descent.
	Yeah, and then there's this.
	You could become the first Indian senator in U.S. history, which would be quite an accomplishment.
	Knock wood. Yeah, the first Indian senator.
	And so she was putting out pictures like this, all dressed as an Indian.
	And then all of a sudden, she did turn black.
	It went from this, in 2016, California's Lala Harris becomes the first Indian American U.S. Senator, said the Associated Press.
	And then four years later, the Associated Press says, Biden picks Lala Harris as running mate, first black woman.
	Well, she was first Indian, then black.
	You know, when we talk about this, and I've said this many times about Obama, I said, so, is Obama black or is Obama white?
	He had a black father.
	We're not really sure who that was, actually.
	There is some question about him.
	Which man was his father?
	But some people said it was a communist activist in Chicago.
	Made a pretty good case of it.
	Joel Gilbert did. But dreams for my real father was his thing.
	But regardless, he had a father who was black and he had a mother who was white.
	And he was raised by that mother and grandparents.
	Folks, is he white or is he black?
	Which one is it more advantageous to be today?
	But the reality is that Obama was 100% CIA. 100% CIA. That family.
	The CIA is a family.
	It is a family like the mafia is a family.
	And he was raised by the CIA. His mother was part of the...
	A CIA cover group that did work abroad.
	But his grandparents were in the OSS, which is what the CIA came out of.
	Well, she made the transition to black.
	Yes, she transitioned.
	And then she's in Atlanta, and she is now really going forward, just like Hillary Clinton.
	She puts on a southern drawl when she's talking to black people.
	Help us win in 2020, and we're going to do it again in 2024.
	2024. Yes, we will.
	So let's get...
	Yeah, well, maybe she's been talking to James Carville.
	I don't know. But then we have this.
	She wants to really double down now on the black...
	She does a southern accent and...
	Black people get reparations.
	I think there has to be some form of reparations, and we can discuss what that is.
	Yeah, I want to have reparations as well.
	And she is now the official candidate for all practical purposes.
	She is the only candidate to qualify for the DNC roll call.
	Isn't that interesting?
	You know, it just shows how Marxist the Democrat Party is.
	They don't even pretend to have votes.
	They have a single candidate.
	First a single candidate was Biden.
	Nobody else is allowed to be on the ballot.
	No debates to anyone.
	Only a single candidate.
	And now they've done it again.
	They force them out of the running and then they have a virtual roll call ballot that they're putting together.
	She will be the only candidate on the ballot.
	Yeah, they've gone full Soviet.
	Full Soviet. Her unchallenged solo position comes after party grandees successfully push Biden to one side and put her on as the unopposed candidate.
	Our party has met this unprecedented moment with a transparent...
	Yeah, it is pretty transparent, right?
	A transparent, democratic, and orderly process.
	Well, it is transparent.
	It is not democratic.
	There's no votes. There's no debates, as a matter of fact, and no primary.
	And they're going to throw out the votes in the primary.
	You know, a lot of people voted for that single candidate, Biden, but they don't care.
	They're going to throw that out.
	Just like they threw out the competing candidates, like RFK Jr.
	And an orderly process.
	What does that mean? That means they order you to do this or they order you to do that.
	Under party rules, a candidate qualifies to compete for the nomination by submitting a notarized declaration of candidacy, meeting legal requirements to be present, securing the electronic signatures of at least 300 delegates, with no more than 50 signatures from any one delegation counting toward the 300 minimum.
	The DNC announced that 3,923 delegates had petitioned to nominate Harris.
	It is a cult.
	They march in lockstep.
	There's not a single individual that has the courage to stand up to this juggernaut that is there.
	That tells you a great deal about the entire party, not just the leadership.
	The leadership whips them into position, and they all obey in unison.
	What a pathetic thing to think that this is one of two parties we've got, and the Republicans are not much better.
	I just look at the fact that everybody's coalesced around Trump and all was about his personality, and the Democrats made it that way with the weaponized persecution.
	They knew exactly what they were doing.
	They wanted to run against Trump, and they wanted to put her in.
	We'll see how that works out.
	The confirmation of Harris came at the same time.
	She attended the campaign rally in Georgia, where she's doing her We're going to take a look at some of the things that Trump has proposed.
	Let's just understand these are positions, they're not principles for any of these people.
	The Democrats are pretty, you can expect that they're going to push pretty hard and try to get through their agenda.
	Not the Republicans. You know, once the election is done, they just walk away from any of the campaign promises.
	So Harris is proposing a middle-class tax increase.
	She wants to have a Bernie Sanders type of health care plan.
	And that's what you're looking at between these two parties.
	But again, what do we know?
	Will the Democrats be able to run this through?
	They certainly will try. The Republicans, in most cases, will not even try.
	At the same time, she's talking about increasing taxes on the middle class.
	Trump is talking about getting rid of taxes on Social Security.
	And we'll talk about that.
	The problem is, why is the Republican Party, the Congress, and this is not Trump, he's not involved with this yet, we'll see what he does, if anything.
	But when you look at Mike Johnson and the rest of them, why are they following along with Biden, To add 80,000 IRS personnel.
	Why are they going to make it?
	Seven times bigger than it is now.
	Seven times bigger than it is now.
	It's just absolutely amazing.
	But, you know, Harris is really more in line with what Washington is really going to do.
	When she was in California as a senator, she proposed a health care plan.
	That was even to the left of Bernie Sanders.
	Because remember, she was considered to be the most radical left of all the senators.
	And Bernie Sanders was there at the time.
	An archived version of her campaign website details her Medicare for All plan.
	She said she personally authorized the proposal.
	And she promised it would provide comprehensive health insurance that covers every American.
	It's like what Hillary Clinton said.
	Tried to do back in the 90s as soon as her husband was elected president.
	She thought she was president and she tried to run through socialized health care where the government takes over health care.
	Harris also provided a link to the Sanders plan which included a 7.5% payroll tax increase for employers and a 4% increase in income tax for households making over $29,000.
	That's right about where they're coming after people taxing them for their Social Security, double taxing it.
	You pay 15%, actually 15.6% of all your wages for all your working life.
	There's no exemptions, no deductions, nothing.
	Flat 15.6%.
	And then when you start to draw it, if you live long enough, they give you a small allowance, which has just been devastated by We're good to go.
	Which means, and it says for employers.
	It's not for employers. The employers are going to pass that along to you in terms of lower wages.
	So she's going to drop wages by 7.5%, increase taxes by 4% to pay for government-run health care.
	While Harris praised the Sanders plan for having good options, she said, well, I'm going to only apply this tax to households making over $100,000.
	Oh, wow. Okay.
	It's still going to be the same thing.
	And there'll still be a bracket creep.
	And they will still move it down.
	We know that's going to happen.
	They will claim they don't have enough money to pay for it.
	And so they're going to have to move the level lower.
	They're going to have to move the rates higher.
	And yet the reality is, they don't really care about paying for what they spend.
	Look at the, and I've got 35 trillion reasons I can give you for why the government doesn't care about matching revenue.
	As soon as somebody starts talking about cutting taxes, well, the Congressional Budget Office gets involved.
	Oh, this is going to require this and this.
	Why? Look at the deficit.
	Look at the accumulated debt.
	I mean, they're adding a trillion dollars every 100 days.
	They're up to 35 trillion dollars.
	They don't care about balancing it.
	And the income tax has never paid for government.
	Never. There's other taxes and fees that are just as significant, if not more so.
	It doesn't have to be done with an income tax.
	Again, what did we do before 1913?
	How did the government run without an income tax?
	So Lala Harris supported eliminating private health insurance.
	That's the other part of it. Not just cutting your wages, raising your taxes, but removing your choices.
	Okay, what is this about health care for women and choices for people about their health care?
	Of course, it was a massive fraud.
	It still astounds me that I've not heard a single Republican, not running for anything in Washington, Throwing it back in their face and saying, you want to call yourself pro-choice?
	What did you do during the pandemic?
	And they don't do that because they were there.
	Shutting down, issuing orders, just like the Democrats during the pandemic.
	That's why they can't defend the pro-life position.
	And they won't defend it.
	They won't even show what it is.
	They're afraid to show what an abortion is.
	And they won't even call out the Democrats for their hypocrisy in calling themselves pro-choice.
	So she wants to eliminate private health insurance, again, just like Hillary Clinton.
	And talking about reparations, even though, when you look at reparations, 68% of Americans oppose reparations.
	They're unworkable.
	Again, when you look at, take Lala Harris, for example.
	She wants reparations.
	Is she black? Is she black?
	Or is she Indian? What about Obama?
	Is he black or is he white?
	How are you going to apply this to the population?
	Just looking at the issues with them.
	And there has been a lot of mixture over many, many generations.
	Besides the fact that it is not fair or equitable or just to punish somebody for what their ancestors did, or even worse.
	Look at the massive waves of immigration that we had after the Civil War from Europe.
	All of those white people have to pay reparations?
	They didn't even have an ancestor in the United States when there was slavery.
	It's absolutely absurd.
	And then you can take it one step further.
	She's from Jamaica.
	Is she black?
	Her family owned slaves.
	And she wants to call for reparations?
	Is she going to pay the reparations?
	Her father bragged about the fact that his family owned slaves in Jamaica.
	So here's a summary that Breitbart put in of her radical record.
	She co-sponsored legislation to protect illegal immigrants from deportation.
	She backed Sanders' Medicare for All legislation.
	Backed banning private health insurance.
	Supported giving taxpayer-funded coverage to illegal immigrants.
	Supported banning fracking.
	Backed defunding the police, compared ICE to the KKK, wanted to ban plastic straws, defended banning offshore drilling, wanted to undo the Trump administration's border security, taking 94 executive actions in their first 100 days to rescind nearly every Trump-era measure, except Trump didn't even close the border, really, except for the COVID stuff.
	supported decriminalizing illegal border crossings, said she wouldn't treat illegal aliens as criminals, called for starting ICE from scratch, argued that temporarily closing the border violated federal law, raised money for the Minnesota Freedom Fund, a far-left organization that pays to bail out of jail violent criminals, including accused murderers and rapists.
	She supported LA's cuts to their police department, called efforts to add more police to the streets wrong-headed thinking.
	She championed the administration's so-called Bidenomics as costs dramatically soared for American families.
	And on and on.
	It would be interesting, wouldn't it, if we made this election about issues?
	And yet it's really going to be about personalities and it's going to be about the kind of stuff Is she black? Is she Indian?
	It's going to be that type of thing.
	That's where Lala wants it.
	That's where Trump wants it.
	That's where the media wants it.
	They're not going to really make it about any issues.
	The New York Times reported, however, that out of those 18 items, Lala Harris has reversed her position on four of them in just a single day.
	Essentially a A PR story for her done by the New York Times saying that she now supports fracking.
	She now wants to increase funding for the border.
	She now does not want to require people to sell their assault weapons back to the government.
	Not back to the government, but to the government.
	Forced buyback. It's not a buyback.
	We didn't buy them from the government, for example.
	Anyway, and number four, no longer supports fracking.
	A single-payer health insurance program.
	That's government-run socialist health care.
	Four of those things she flipped on in just one day.
	Do you believe any of that?
	I don't believe that either.
	Lala's 90-year-old ex-lover talks about this election.
	Yeah, he's still kicking.
	Willie Brown.
	Willie Brown, he's now 90 years old.
	And what he said in his interview was he thinks that Biden should step down as president so she can take the job.
	I think that will happen between now and the election.
	I think it'll happen between the coronation party and the election.
	I think he'll either step down or they...
	I don't know that they've got the votes to do the 25th Amendment thing on him.
	But they might give him some golden parachute or some golden slippers, for example.
	Maybe they could get some from Trump, you know, some golden sneakers.
	And they could sneakily remove him.
	I think they would do that in order to boost her position.
	It depends on how they think she's doing, I think.
	But I don't think that'll happen until the convention.
	They want to keep a steady stream of events happening.
	That are going to build her up.
	Again, this is like a high school student council election.
	But anyway, he was 60 years old when he began dating her, quote-unquote.
	And he was running for mayor of San Francisco.
	And she was unknown as a 29-year-old prosecutor.
	And he made her entire career.
	He was very powerful...
	In California, he had been Speaker of the House for a long time, and then he was running for Mayor of San Francisco.
	She considers him to be one of her political mentors.
	I think sugar daddy is maybe a better phrase to describe him.
	He also revealed that Harris was not Nancy Pelosi's first choice for President.
	And he worked to make sure that Gavin Newsom, Who was her first choice, I think, was fully behind Harris because Gavin Newsom and Harris are related remotely there.
	Brown confirmed the story about how when he was dating Lala in the 90s and participating in an event at Harvard, then business developer Trump flew Brown, Harris, and his team aboard his private plane for a meeting in New York.
	Harris was not at the meeting, but Brown says he's got a picture of himself and of Harris on Trump's plane.
	And, of course, he gave her a lot of money.
	He gave her, I don't know why he's lavishing money on a Democrat in California, but Trump did.
	Flew him around his plane. And they're very excited about all of that, of course.
	And you had Ivanka gave her money as well.
	Why is Ivanka giving her money?
	When they dated, Brown was considered the most powerful politician in California, although he was still married.
	Nevertheless, he was estranged from his wife, who lived in a different home than he did.
	He appointed Harris to two different state boards.
	Those boards paid her $400,000 over five years.
	And then he gave her the keys to a BMW. And then the introductions and the endorsements that were there, introductions to wealthy backers, endorsements in public.
	During her first run as San Francisco District Attorney, Brown donated to her campaign and helped to raise money for the race.
	Harris famously threw Brown under the bus during her campaign, insisting that her romantic and political connection with Willie Brown was over.
	Willie Brown's not going to be around.
	He's gone. Hello, people.
	Move on, she said at the time.
	She told San Francisco Weekly that in a 2003 magazine profile.
	She insisted that she would be independent of Brown and that he would probably right now express some fright about the fact that he cannot control me.
	His career is over, and I will be alive and kicking for the next 40 years.
	I don't owe him a thing, she said.
	Wow. How's that for gratitude?
	Maybe she had paid him in full.
	She was kind of upset about the cost, maybe.
	But he shared his opinion with the San Francisco Standard just recently.
	He said, you can easily underestimate Lala Harris, but if you do, you'll be looking up from the dungeon for the queen who will be on the throne.
	Yeah, she is a queen, isn't she?
	And you can bet she's going to try to put her opponents in the dungeon.
	That's another characteristic of the Democrat Party right now, isn't it?
	Yeah, just like the Marxists, they don't have elections.
	Just like the Marxists, they've got one candidate.
	And just like the Marxists, they will lock up their opponents.
	And the money raising is filthy dirty.
	I'm surprised, really, that there hasn't been more talk about We're good to go.
	Waiting until they get closer to election date to think that it's going to have more of an impact?
	I think that's a big mistake.
	I think they did that with the Hunter Biden laptop in 2020.
	We all knew about the Hunter Biden laptop, just like we all knew what was going to happen with the election corruption, the vote-by-mail stuff.
	All of that was known. That was not a surprise.
	I'm looking at it like everybody's astounded the day after the election that it was massive fraud from all this vote-by-mail stuff.
	And the Hunter Biden stuff.
	Easily shut down by these people.
	They can muddy the water.
	They can delay this stuff.
	If you wait until the last minute, of course they're going to do that.
	And we knew in the summer, actually before that, there had been a lot of talk about it years before, but we knew about the Hunter Biden laptop.
	And thought they were going to do something about it in the summer, but they didn't do anything at all until the last minute.
	Tried to save it as an October surprise.
	And they got nothing at all out of it.
	They really don't know how to roll out the scandals, do they?
	And it is a scandal. And it should be talked about.
	And so, it's not just Sugar Daddy Willie that's funneling money into her in illicit ways.
	It's also this Act Blue thing.
	And it's not just James O'Keefe who's going around and doing it.
	Here's another group. That went around in another town where he was not doing it, asking people questions about, okay, so ActBlue has you making all these donations, multiple donations a day, tens of thousands of dollars, and these are people who don't have that kind of money.
	Last year in 2022, it showed that you donated 1,113 times, so like 4 times a day.
	No, that's not possible.
	About $13,347.84.
	No, so that's not possible.
	And the year before that, in 2021, 715 times, about $6,957.90.
	No, sir. No, sir.
	Did not. And then 2020, 839 times, about $6,983.10.
	No, sir. Just from 2016 to 2022, Just total, in that year, about $29,107.
	I don't have that kind of money, sir.
	I'm on Social Security.
	I don't have that kind of money to donate.
	Okay. Sir, that's not even possible.
	I don't even get on my phone or the Internet that much.
	I have donated to political parties in the past.
	I do do that. But there's no way on earth I donate five, six times a day to somebody.
	Five or six times a day, yeah.
	She's on Social Security. We're going to talk about that when we come back.
	We'll be right back. You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Well, Trump put out on his Truth Social account yesterday, all uppercase screaming, seniors should not pay tax on Social Security.
	Well, I absolutely agree with that.
	It's a winning proposition to end taxes for people.
	He knows that. That's why he's talking about ending it for people who get tips.
	Now he talks about ending it for seniors who are on Social Security.
	You know what? If you really want to win an election, why don't you talk about abolishing the IRS? Back in the early 90s, when I was involved in third-party politics, we would talk about that, and everybody would just say, come on, come on, you know.
	Let's get real. What do you really want to do?
	You're never going to do that.
	And it's like, no, we're serious about that.
	Well, now other people have seriously talked about it.
	Why not talk about it?
	You want to win an election? Get rid of the income tax.
	Get rid of the 80,000 new IRS agents that are on the way.
	Well, they won't do it.
	And that tells you a great deal about which agenda they're following, doesn't it?
	Because if you want to make sure that people own nothing, well, that's the way to do it with the IRS, isn't it?
	And why do we have this?
	That's what I tweeted. I retweeted.
	Thomas Massey saw that and he says, yes, exactly.
	And I introduced a bill to do this exact sort of thing.
	And I said, hey, why don't you just get rid of the income tax altogether?
	It doesn't come anywhere close to paying for the cost of government as it is.
	You guys don't care about the deficit.
	Thomas Massey does.
	But again, we're talking about Washington in general.
	And it doesn't come close to us.
	So why pretend? And why do we have the income tax?
	Well, it is there to cut off the lower rungs of the ladder so that you and I don't climb up it where these people are.
	And to keep us so busy trying to make ends meet that we can't get involved and think about politics.
	We're just trying to keep bread on the table, right?
	That's what it's there for.
	So let's talk about the numbers here and what Social Security has done.
	First of all, As I've said many times, when you go back and look to see where Social Security came from, it came from Germany.
	Not right, there should be a red flag.
	The regimented Germany, nothing good politically comes out of Germany.
	So, Bismarck set up the age of 65 because that was life expectancy.
	They didn't intend for anybody to collect it.
	It has always been a Ponzi scheme.
	There isn't an account with your name on it.
	They don't expect you to collect it.
	And when life expectancy went up and people started living longer, it's like, okay, we've got to raise the age.
	Why? Because we don't want to pay anybody this stuff.
	We want to hold this out there as you would a carrot on a stick in front of a donkey that you're riding to keep it moving forward.
	It's just a Ponzi scheme.
	Currently, if you're single and your combined income, your Social Security income plus an outside job, so if your Social Security plus an outside job is more than $25,000, you'll have to pay the standard income tax rate, up to $12,500 of your annual Social Security income.
	If you're single and your combined income exceeds $34,000, You may have to pay the standard income tax rate of up to 85% of that $34,000.
	Can't have people getting rich, right?
	Give me a break.
	You pay 15.6% your entire life.
	No deductions. No exceptions.
	And then when you collect this, if it's at the poverty level, if it's above the poverty level, they take it back.
	Thresholds are only a little higher for a joint income.
	$32,000 and $44,000.
	So, it would be great if they got rid of it.
	It would be great if they got rid of all of the income tax.
	They've had this for 110 years, 111 years.
	It's 111.
	It's time, just like Bilbo Baggins, for this thing to vanish.
	But prior to 1984, Social Security wasn't even taxed.
	Did you realize that? Reagan brought that in.
	Ronald Reagan brought in taxes on Social Security.
	So, you know, from its creation in the 1930s until 1984, so for half a century, they didn't even tax Social Security, which is the way it ought to be.
	Honestly, you know, you've already paid the taxes.
	That's why you're collecting it.
	However, when the law changed in 1984, the U.S. median income was $24,850.
	Does that sound familiar to the numbers that we're just talking about?
	It hasn't moved now.
	Only the individuals whose income exceeded $25,000 had their Social Security taxed, while the threshold for joint filers was $32,000.
	They haven't moved those numbers in 40 years.
	And so, when we look at what the median family income is today, it's not $25,000.
	It is now $75,000.
	Well, $74,580 and the other was $24,850.
	That's $25,000 and $75,000.
	The median family income has tripled.
	And yet, the level on which you start to have your Social Security taken away has stayed the same.
	That is despicable on multiple levels.
	The idea that there will be this much inflation...
	That is also devastating to people who want to retire because inflation eats away your wealth.
	And the fact that they would leave these brackets the same.
	We're talking about bracket creep.
	But nowhere is the bracket creep worse than in the taxes on Social Security.
	They haven't budged. They haven't moved an inch.
	So the tax thresholds are the same they were 40 years ago, and yet Median income has tripled, which is another way that they can scam you, right, besides the age, to make sure that you actually don't collect anything.
	That's the way this thing has always worked.
	It has always been a scam.
	I told Karen when we were in college, I said, yeah, I'm more likely to be invaded by space aliens than to collect anything from Social Security.
	The Republican Party's platform, which was approved earlier this month, personally written in part by Trump, rules out cuts to Social Security and Medicare, including any potential lifting of the retirement age.
	Meanwhile, they call in somebody, you know, the Congressional Budget Office is like Ghostbusters.
	They're waiting by the phone in case anybody talks about cutting any taxes anywhere.
	Oh, they're ready to scare you.
	Okay, so here they come.
	You can't do that!
	The country will go bankrupt.
	Where were they $35 trillion ago?
	The Congressional Budget Office and other organizations.
	Have projected that the trust funds behind Social Security and Medicare will run dry at some point in the mid-2030s.
	So we can't cut any taxes on that stuff.
	No, no. Can't do that.
	They're not worried about the $35 trillion.
	They don't care about spending more and more money.
	They've got every kind of project you can imagine.
	I guess if we want to collect money from the U.S. government...
	You're going to have to move to Ukraine or to Israel, right?
	Because there's no limit to the amount of money that they'll send to Ukraine and Israel.
	But not for Americans.
	Did you see the Congressional Budget Office complaining about the money to Ukraine and Israel?
	Or any of the other things, any of the green grifts that they've got going on?
	No. No.
	But boy, if you mention or even talk about the slightest tax cut, They come running and screaming outside of the Congressional Budget Office.
	Wait, wait, wait, no, no, we can't do that.
	So they said, if you were to do something, if they were run out of money in 10 years, and how many times have we seen this happen?
	You think they're going to run out of money?
	Are they going to not be able to run the printing machines anymore?
	One of the reasons why the median family income has gone up by a factor of three is 300%.
	And the purchasing power has gone down, hasn't it?
	Are you better off than you were 40 years ago?
	Remember, that was Ronald Reagan's campaign slogan against Jimmy Carter.
	Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?
	People obviously said no.
	Well, now I can say to Reagan, I'm not better off than I was 40 years ago.
	No American is better off than they were 40 years ago.
	But what a joke.
	They're going to try to balance this.
	We've got to balance the budget when it comes to tax cuts.
	Nothing else are they concerned about.
	But when it comes to tax cuts, you've got to balance it.
	Trump is correct, said Thomas Massey.
	Taxing seniors on their Social Security retirement twice makes absolutely no sense.
	Well, yeah, it does if you understand the purpose is to harm us.
	That makes sense. He said, my bill, the Senior Citizens Tax Elimination Act, exempts Social Security retirement payments from taxation.
	And when people said, well, you know, did you do that all on your own?
	He says, well, I had a lot of help from Ron Paul.
	You know, just like with the Prime Act.
	You know, he works with, he doesn't, you know, do all the stuff by himself.
	He works with other people. Other people have good ideas.
	It's just like the Prime Act.
	That allows people to raise and kill beef in a humane way without sending them to the USDA slaughter monopoly lots.
	He had some help from Frank Nicely on that.
	And he's got some great ideas for pushing back against centralized control.
	It is truly amazing.
	Today, by the way, if you're in Tennessee, today is the election, the primary election.
	You want to make sure that there are a lot of suspicious characters, like the one running against Frank Nicely, who don't have any background.
	No bio, no family, no business, no job history, no work experience history, nothing.
	He has no position on issues, but he does have a lot of money from the Walmart Foundation.
	The Walton family funds, who support the Aspen, they have just flooded the area with negative ads and signs, and all he does is push out made-up lies about Frank Nicely, saying, well, he's not conservative or anything.
	No, actually, he's better than conservative.
	Most conservatives don't do anything.
	They said, oh, we don't want to change this.
	He wants to fix things, and he's got ideas, and he has done it.
	Anyway, if you're in Tennessee, make sure you vote today.
	But again, he said, no, Ron Paul introduced this just before he left.
	But I said, you know, the purpose of government is not to pay for their spending.
	The purpose of the income tax, I should say, is not to pay for government spending, as $35 trillion attests.
	But it's just to keep us enslaved to all of this.
	On Rumble, a comment from Knight J. Lovin, taxes are not funding the government.
	They're defunding the people.
	That's a good way to put it. That's really a good way to put it.
	Yeah. It's about defunding the people.
	And it is about concentration of economic wealth.
	And you know, the guy who founded Papa John's, John Shatner, I wrote an op-ed piece, and it was published by Breitbart, and he is laser-focused on this, and we're going to talk about that when we come back.
	We're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back.
	You're listening to the Daily Show.
	I'm your host, Scott Galloway.
	And this is the Daily Show.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	you.
	Bye.
	On Rumble, Ann Seller says, I'm headed to vote locally in a bit, David, voting for Senator Nicely.
	I was up his way this weekend.
	He has so much support.
	Well, I hope so. That's good.
	Yeah, I just look at these flyers, you know, this other guy, and it is classic.
	Just classic. I remember when I was a senior in high school, we had to take a class.
	It was a half-year class.
	They called it Problems in American democracy.
	But at that point in time, they were not trying to deconstruct America.
	What they did was they spent most of the time talking about the problems with communism and Russia.
	That's the way the schools were when I grew up.
	That's why it's so amazing to see how they flipped But one of the things that they would do is tell people, you know, be careful of the candidate who speaks in glittering generalities and things like that.
	You know, they would make up little catchphrases like that.
	But I've never seen it worse than this particular guy.
	And it makes sense that he'd have a lot of outside funding A Tennessee conservative even did op-ed pieces in a video about this particular race because Senator Nicely tried to stop outside money coming in.
	Put a cap, said that you're not going to get more than 30% of your funding for your race from out of state.
	Unfortunately, that didn't pass.
	And unfortunately, the out-of-state people who want to control what's going on in Tennessee targeted him.
	That's what's really going on with this stuff, folks.
	Papa John's founder, John Shatner.
	The troubling future for fast food franchisees.
	He said, fast foods and American innovation has been around for over 80 years.
	Despite lasting durability, the unit economics for fast food brands and franchisees have been strained to a breaking point.
	When the team and I built Papa John's to over 5,000 stores worldwide, I did not see them as one big corporation, but as 5,000 separate independent restaurants.
	These small businesses are struggling today, and we need action to help save them.
	And right there is the issue.
	Because right there, folks, is what is happening.
	He talks about Newsom's...
	Minimum wage increase, kicking this stuff off, but it's also the lockdown wreaked havoc on them.
	As I said, Trump saying that people on Main Street were non-essential.
	Wall Street was essential.
	And a lot of what is happening, especially with Newsom, is to attack these individual franchisees.
	It'll wind up, these stores will be taken over by the Wall Street franchisor.
	And then they will have the capital they can raise on Wall Street to buy the automated robots that are being sold by the technocrats who are supporting Newsom.
	This is what is happening with this.
	None of these politicians, Republican or Democrat, want there to be small businesses.
	That's why they tax us.
	That's why they saw the lower rungs off of the ladder.
	That's why they're doing this process right now.
	And when you look at what is going to happen with this, is it a coincidence that the people who support people like Newsom and others, that is it a coincidence that they're going to be the ones who are going to benefit from this type of policy?
	He says some examples of some formerly prolific chains that have fallen into obscurity include Bob Evans, Long John Silver's, Godfather's Pizza, Checkers and Rally's.
	He said part of the reason for this is that the very essence of fast food is changing.
	Fast food has always been known as a quick, easy, and above all, affordable way for middle class families to enjoy a meal.
	In recent years, however, fast food prices have begun outpacing wage gains for working Americans.
	As a result, news outlets are filled with stories about disgruntled consumers complaining about the skyrocketing prices of seemingly simple fare.
	Well, you know, the other thing that's been outpacing wage gains is tax rates, like I was talking about with Social Security especially.
	And I know that we talk about the quality of food at fast food places, and I'm not here to sing the praises of junk food.
	I'm just saying that from an economic standpoint...
	I'm looking at it from an economic standpoint, not from a nutritional standpoint.
	I'm not recommending these fast food chains and all the additives that are in them.
	I'm just saying that this is part of the bigger plan to make sure that there are no independent businesses.
	That you'll own nothing.
	Because one of the few things that are left for entrepreneurs are these service businesses, key among them the restaurants.
	And that's why they came after the restaurants so viciously during Trump's lockdowns.
	This could be an existential problem for an industry that is based largely on affordability, he says.
	And then he talks about Gavin Newsom and his astronomical...
	Increase in minimum wage, but only for the fast food chains.
	And I said, that was, in my opinion, very telling.
	Because that was a real push to incentivize, give an economic incentive to make human employees incredibly expensive to justify replacing them with robots.
	And to essentially force that if people want to stay in business.
	Before the law event took effect, fast food companies in California cut 10,000 jobs.
	Thousands more job losses coming in the first month after the new minimum wage took effect.
	To make matters worse, the new law forced fast food franchisees to raise prices.
	In the first month, Wendy's raised prices by 8%, Chipotle by 7.5%, Starbucks by 7%.
	You know, Panera didn't have to do that because Panera was exempted.
	Panera was exempted because they're friends of Gavin Newsom.
	But these drastic increases are enough to send many customers looking for alternatives.
	Everyone wants hardworking food workers to make good earnings, but they can't do that if they lose their job because a small business can't afford the mandated minimum wage.
	Workers in fast food, pizza delivery, and other franchise industries are not paid by the corporations that own the brand.
	But by the franchisees who own the majority of the restaurants.
	And we've talked about that.
	We've talked about the lady who had an Arby's that had a view for most of its existence of the Hollywood sign there in L.A., She was in her 90s.
	She had had that business, I forget what it was, 50 or 60 years.
	Then shortly after that, there was another family franchisee, I think it was McDonald's maybe, but they'd had their business for like 40 years and they had to shut down because of all this, all these in California.
	Again, the Newsom move is to consolidate ownership and wealth into the Wall Street franchises.
	That will then buy the robots from his technocrat supporters.
	Papa John's executives mistakenly assumed, he said, that the artificial boost that COVID gave to the pizza delivery business was a new normal.
	Now that lockdowns are over, this inflationary economy has ravaged businesses with rising interest rates, costs of goods and wages, plus supply chain delays and unfilled staff positions.
	As a result, pizza delivery orders are on the decline, and franchisees are feeling the same pressure that other companies are experiencing.
	He goes on to say that he doesn't really have a solution for it.
	This is part of the plan.
	This is not just unforeseen circumstances.
	This is the plan.
	As much a plan as the fact that they're talking about bird flu as the next pandemic, and the first thing they do is go look at milk.
	Milk from cows.
	I mean, it's pretty obvious. They always said they wanted to get rid of meat and dairy.
	And so when you see this, you know this is part of the plan.
	But staying on Trump and politics...
	The knives are out.
	Says a real clear energy.
	The knives are out for J.D. Vance because he is a climate skeptic.
	And that's a good thing.
	I'm glad that he is a climate skeptic.
	They call him a denier because to them it is a religion.
	I just say to these people, I'm a climate infidel.
	I don't believe in your religion.
	But New York Times, The Independent, The Guardian, New York Times says, J.D. Vance is an oil booster and a doubter of human-caused climate change.
	Good. The Independent.
	J.D. Vance says, climate activists alarmed by Trump's dangerous pick for Vice President.
	The Guardian. Climate advocates fear picking J.D. Vance for VP is a dangerous step backward.
	Now, all that would be good.
	The problem is that we've seen J.D. Vance reinvent himself over and over again.
	I mean, he's just, you know, flip a coin to find out what his position is on a given day.
	I was talking to some friends about that over the weekend, and they said, well, you know, it's good he comes from a humble background.
	I said, he went to Yale.
	People that are there, a lot of people are saying he was in Skull and Bones, but that aligns with the kind of allies that he made when he was at Yale.
	But... I said, you know, Bill Clinton started out very poor, and he turned out...
	I mean, the bottom line is that he's a social climber, and I don't know that he's got any principles that he's really going to stand behind.
	You know, just like Trump.
	They're all over the place.
	The former venture capitalist is a known critic of climate change and renewable energy, as said the Independent out of the UK. But again...
	Does he have any principles that he's going to stand for?
	Or is it simply about winning and doing whatever is going to advance his agenda personally?
	Vance has also criticized the green energy fantasy, that he calls it, of the Biden administration, pointing out that, quote, solar panels can't power a modern manufacturing economy, unquote, and said that's why the Chinese are building coal power plants.
	He's 100% right on this.
	He similarly called out wind power turbines.
	He said they're hideously ugly, they kill all the birds, and they're mostly made in China.
	True, true, true.
	And then he says in a July 2022 radio interview, he said the whole EV thing is a scam.
	If you plug it into your wall, do these people think there are Keebler elves back there making electricity in the wall?
	The electricity, of course, comes from fossil fuels.
	I love that quote.
	You know, there's a lot of people who really do think that, who really do think there's Keebler elves there.
	I've said many times that some of the people I was working with, when I was working with a group, American Tradition Institute, that David Schneer had worked 30 years for the EPA. He saw them go from trying to clean up the environment to becoming, you know, to trying to shut down our energy.
	You know, not just, you know, trying to keep it clean, but just to shut it down.
	And so he retired and he began opposing them.
	And he said he'd go around and ask people, what kind of energy is your favorite kind of energy?
	And he said it never failed.
	There would always be one idiot who would raise their hand and say, I like electricity.
	I like turtles.
	I like electricity.
	Where do you think that comes from?
	Well, it must be Keebler elves in the wall.
	I think that's a great quote from J.D. Vance.
	As a climate change skeptic, Vance stands in good company.
	So that's real clear energy.
	For instance, the 2022 Nobel Laureate in Physics, John Clouser, exposed in a recent lecture how the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the UN's IPCC, how their models and their analyses don't meet basic standards of scientific inquiry.
	It's not science, folks. Smoke mirror in computer models.
	The IPCC models have been used as proof, quote-unquote, of scientific consensus by politicians and activists to support claims of climate crisis.
	Another example would be Richard Lindzen, an American atmospheric physicist and emeritus professor of meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, published an assessment of the global warming narrative in 2022 as well.
	Professor Lindzen finds climate alarmism, quote, a quasi-religious movement predicated on an absurd scientific narrative.
	The policies invoked on behalf of this movement have led to the U.S. hobbling its energy system, unquote.
	Whatever your views on climate science, it's apparent that Vance is not a wild-eyed outlier in his skepticism of the claims of climate policy advocates, as asserted by his many critics.
	I just hope that he supports it.
	I just don't know what the principles are for any of these people.
	At the same time, when you look at the shortlist for Harris's VP, this guy, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, And, of course, you got Mark Kelly.
	The people who are being considered are the people who oppose the Second Amendment.
	I mean, that's right at the top.
	So she's looking. She's got her credentials out there.
	Nobody is more radical on abortion than Lala Harris.
	Absolutely nobody. She supported and refused to prosecute Planned Parenthood.
	Doing murder for hire.
	They get a contract from, turns out, Fauci, Francis Collins, and other people like that.
	They get a contract saying they want these particular body parts.
	And they're willing to have a baby be born alive and kill them with vivisection outside of the womb.
	Typically they do that inside the womb.
	But they murder the baby live because you're going to damage the organs if you don't deliver the baby first.
	Or if you use some kind of chemical to kill the baby.
	It's the same thing that they do when they harvest organs from adult humans in China into prisons.
	They kill them that way.
	You don't even want to, you know, like shoot them in the head because then your body releases things that are going to damage the organs as well.
	So when that was exposed, Lala Harris went after the whistleblowers and is still going after the whistleblowers.
	She's no longer Attorney General in California.
	That was then passed on to Javier Becerra, who is now head of HHS, head of the organization that was buying the baby parts.
	And had the contracts out to kill the babies so that they could create humanized mice.
	Both of them brought into the Biden administration.
	So nobody's more radical than her on abortion.
	So they've got to find a guy like Tim Walz or a guy like Mark Kelly who's going to be radical on the Second Amendment as well, because that's another thing that she's really radical on.
	So Tim Walz goes after J.D. Vance on guns.
	But I just have to say, don't worry liberals, Trump hates guns as well.
	You know, his executive orders to take the guns and do the due process later.
	That's not due process, as we've always said.
	In an interview with CNN anchor Anderson Cooper, Waltz bragged about his shooting skills while offering a word salad of support for gun control.
	He says, that's what J.D. Vance's stick is, talking about guns.
	Well, I guarantee you that he can't shoot pheasants like I can.
	Well, I can guarantee you that that's not what the Second Amendment is about.
	It's not about shooting pheasants.
	It's not about fox hunting, either, or any other kind of elitist thing.
	And, of course, I know there's people who aren't elitist who hunt pheasants.
	It's just pheasants sounds like a fox hunt or something like that.
	But it's not about hunting at all, any kind of hunting.
	It's not about sports competition.
	It is about keeping the government in line.
	In the same way that we had mutually assured destruction in terms of nuclear weapons between Russia and America.
	It's like, yeah, you know, it's going to kill us all if you kick that off.
	And that's what the guns are there about.
	It's to tell the government that it is going to be total civil war and anarchy if you try to take them.
	And so, anyway...
	He says, and that's part of saying, but you know what?
	I guarantee that I don't want weapons of war in classrooms.
	Well, weapons of war is really what the Second Amendment is about.
	It's about having a trained militia that is actually given weapons of war by the government and trained to use them so that we don't have a standing army.
	And of course, when we talk about classrooms...
	That means allowing people the ability to protect themselves, which the Democrats don't want.
	He says there's no reason you can't have reasonable restrictions around that without infringing on your Second Amendment.
	Well, any restriction is an infringement.
	That's the word salad there.
	Any restriction is an infringement, even if it's just around the edges.
	That's where the fringe is.
	So, again, pheasant hunting, weapons of war.
	Look, Second Amendment and things like that came out of the experience of the colonists who had the British come for their cannons.
	Their cannons at Concord and Lexington.
	And you had Santa Ana come for the cannons at Goliad.
	That's why on the original flag, it's not what you've seen so many times, they put an AR-15 or something like that on a flag and say, come and take it.
	No, the original come and take it had a cannon on it because it was about independent militias that could protect from a tyrannical, centralized government.
	In New Jersey, the AR-15 ban that was passed there has now been ruled unconstitutional But, large capacity magazines were ruled to be constitutional.
	Not the magazine, the ban on the magazines was ruled to be constitutional.
	This is from a single judge, U.S. District Judge Peter Sheridan.
	What he tried to do, the single judge, he tried to split the baby.
	There were two components of this.
	One of them was a blanket ban on anything that was an assault rifle, quote-unquote.
	And then the other one was a ban on large-capacity magazines.
	So he said, no, you can't ban the assault rifle, but you can ban the magazine.
	So I would imagine that this is definitely going to be appealed, because by giving one of these issues to the Second Amendment supporters and another issue to the gun controllers, it's a given that one or both of them are going to appeal this case.
	He declared that the AR-15 rifle is not an assault firearm, as defined in the New Jersey Criminal Code.
	He said the AR-15 provision of the assault firearms law in New Jersey is unconstitutional under Bruin and Heller, these two Supreme Court cases, as to the Colt AR-15 for use of self-defense within the home.
	He said, under the Heller decision, the right of Americans to own and keep firearms in their home for lawful self-defense is covered under the Second Amendment.
	The Heller decision affirmed what we always knew, that the Second Amendment is a right of the people.
	It recognizes a God-given right.
	It doesn't create that right, but it recognizes the God-given right of the people to keep and bear arms.
	So we always knew that.
	But the Supreme Court didn't really acknowledge that it was an individual right until the Heller decision.
	And then with the Bruin decision, they said, we're going to use a standard of history and tradition as a test for owning guns.
	Now, I think that's really silly, but that is what the Supreme Court said.
	According to this Judge Sheridan, New Jersey's AR-15 prohibition cannot stand as it is inconsistent with America's historical tradition of gun regulation by banning an entire class of commonly used firearms that are used for home defense.
	Did you realize that when you go out and you buy an AR-15 or some other pistol or something, you're casting a vote as the Supreme Court and these judges see it?
	You're casting a vote to say this is common?
	It's an odd thing, but that's the way they're looking at this, so I guess go buy some more.
	In this court's understanding, buy some other types of guns that you don't currently have to try to make them commonly owned and protect them according to this Supreme Court rule.
	In this court's understanding of the Supreme Court precedent, a categorical ban on a class of weapons commonly used for self-defense is unlawful, he said.
	However, how does he then say, That you can't have large capacity magazines.
	Anything that holds more than 10 rounds of ammunition.
	And again, that is also very common.
	There are a lot of very small pistols that are used for concealed carry that carry more than 10 rounds.
	It's ridiculous.
	And yet it bans those magazines.
	I mean, it doesn't even ban the fact, you know, you could have something that has 12 or 13 rounds that you can put in a small pistol, but it would ban that even if you don't put more than 10 rounds in it.
	The magazine has the capacity, and it's the fact that it's got the capacity that they ban the magazine.
	It's not how many bullets you got in your gun, but the magazine's capacity that's banned.
	So again, it tried to split the baby.
	And there's something...
	Both sides are going to be unhappy with this.
	Both sides will appeal this ridiculous decision.
	And he says the only way that you can possess these magazines that have more than 10 rounds of ammunition is if you register them.
	Again, a lot of small pistols.
	They want now to be registered as an assault firearm.
	And what was his argument for doing this?
	He said that the...
	Large capacity magazine ban is different from the categorical ban on AR-15s because the law doesn't restrict the number of magazines a person can own, just their capacity.
	He also reasoned that the unprecedented rapidity and damage of mass shootings supports a nuanced reading.
	Oh, okay, so he's not basing this on the law then, but on his feelings about current events.
	Well, you know, the thing is, if you've got somebody who's doing a mass shooting, you might want to have somebody there that's got pistols, maybe got 12 or 13 rounds in it.
	And those pistols are going to be banned or have to be registered, according to his decision.
	It is absolutely absurd.
	Well, finally, many people died, and for what?
	People are asking about the Ukrainian war.
	Ukrainians are increasingly willing to make peace with Russia as the war rages on.
	Well, of course.
	There's absolutely no way they can win.
	As Colonel McGregor said, that's like the United States having a war with Mexico.
	There's no way Mexico is going to win.
	They don't have the firepower, they don't have the population to be able to withstand that over a period of time.
	He said from the very beginning, make peace sooner rather than later.
	Why let all of these people die?
	What is the purpose of any of this?
	And when I look at the, and I put this here with Trump and the current election, Because, you know, folks, when you look at this, the claims that Trump is the only one who's going to give us peace, well, none of the others really want it, or even say that they want it.
	I don't know that Trump wants it either.
	Look at the timeline.
	You know, this all began when the Obama administration did a coup in Ukraine.
	And after that coup, some of the people said, well, we don't want to be a part of that government.
	We're... We're geographically close to Russia, culturally, religiously close to them.
	We speak Russian or whatever.
	We have largely a Russian identifying population, Crimea and other places.
	We want to be with Russia.
	No, you're not going to do that.
	So we had a civil war that began at the end of that coup.
	Well, that went from 2014 to 2016 under Obama.
	Three years. The war went on.
	The civil war went on for three years.
	And then that civil war with Ukraine bombing Russia, To cities and civilian centers.
	Ukraine was doing that to Ukrainian cities.
	That went on for four years under Trump.
	So it went on three years under Obama, who kicked off the coup, and then for another four years under Trump.
	And now it has gone for another four years under Biden.
	Two years of a civil war, and two years of Russia after the invasion of it.
	So what is the point of all this, and why If Trump is the guy who's going to bring peace, why didn't he do something about it at that point?
	Yes, of course, Russia had not invaded, but still.
	We're going to take a quick break, and we'll be right back.
	Unlike most revolutions, where the people rise against a real economic oppression, in our case here in Boston, we are fighting for purely an abstract principle.
	It is, however, not nearly so abstract as the young gentleman supposes.
	The issue involved here is one of monopoly.
	Hey!
	Today the British government will monopolize the sale of tea in our country.
	Tomorrow it will be something else.
	I'm sorry.
	Where can I even buy it?
	Probably not.
	Neredore?
	Liberty.
	It's your move.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Well, as I said at the top of the show, we have General Milley who is now cashing in on his...
	Yeah, right. He's now cashing in.
	He is on the Speaker's Tour, getting lots and lots of money, just as Hillary Clinton did.
	And he's made some interesting statements about what the military is going to look like in the next decade.
	He says anywhere from one-half to one-third of the military will be robots.
	Since retiring from the military, says The Intercept, Milley has become a senior advisor to J.P. Morgan, He joined the faculties of Princeton and Georgetown and has embraced the lucrative paid speaking circuit.
	From his military pay of $204,000 a year, Milley is sure to skyrocket the compensation in the millions, especially because he's represented by the same high-powered speakers agency as Hillary Clinton, who was criticized in 2016 for her paid speeches to Goldman Sachs.
	At one of these highly paid conferences, Milley predicted, with no apparent concern, that up to a third of U.S. military personnel will be robots in 10 years.
	He said 10 to 15 years from now, my guess is a third, maybe 25% to a third of the U.S. military will be robotic.
	And, of course, big advantages for the technocracy to swap out humans, right?
	Because robot soldiers don't ask questions.
	They don't have any moral qualms.
	They don't require lifelong health care from the VA or for PTSD. They don't require hazard pay.
	They don't require any compensation when their robot limbs get blown off.
	And most importantly, they have no allegiance to the Constitution whatsoever.
	They've already gotten rid of so many of the soldiers who did, using the litmus test of the mRNA injection.
	Futurism says that last week, the agency France Press AFP reported that China had flaunted the gun-carrying robo-dogs, you know, the ones that they copied from Boston Dynamics.
	I mean, direct copy.
	They flaunted them with guns.
	They've added a gun to the Boston Dynamics dog.
	A 15-day joint military exercise with Cambodia they dubbed the Golden Dragon.
	Video of the robots showed them hopping and diving and shooting the machine gun that was strapped onto its back at targets.
	It can serve as a new member in our urban combat operations, so the soldier featured in the two-minute clip, replacing our members to conduct reconnaissance, to identify the enemy, and to strike the target.
	And as they copied most of it from Boston Dynamics, it's cheap.
	It only costs $2,800.
	They can operate on their own from anywhere from two to four hours.
	Well, that's going to be a big part of the autonomous robots to do reconnaissance and to kill.
	Meanwhile, in the...
	Replacement of human beings is not just going to be this very concerning thing, autonomous killer robots.
	But universal basic income has been tied to artificial intelligence and robotics from the very beginning.
	For more than a decade, we've been talking about this.
	And now they're combining these two things, UBI and AI. Mercedes-Benz is now going to be using humanoid robots now.
	And their factories, and of course they've had very specialized robots in their factories to do welding and things like that, typically fixed, they call them robots, but they were single purpose, you know, welding robots and things like that.
	But now they're going to use them in a more general way.
	This is what the robot looks like.
	It's the Aptronics Apollo humanoid robot.
	It's 5 feet 8 inches in height that weighs 160 pounds.
	It can lift 55 pounds.
	It can currently run for 4 hours on a single battery pack.
	The general purpose robot has arms and legs as well as eyes with LED lights and a screen on its chest that can display different types of information.
	Its mouth is another screen of sorts that can display a slight smile, a wrench icon, or its battery charge status.
	So it's got a four-hour battery, but it's on, you know, recharge the whole robot, you know, like the cars, because the battery packs are smaller.
	You can remove the battery pack, put a fresh one on it, keep the thing running so it doesn't run out of juice.
	And you can save electricity by removing its legs and mounting its torso on a metal post if you want.
	The announcement suggests that Mercedes may use Apollo to inspect vehicle parts, bring parts to the assembly line for human workers to assemble, and deliver kitted parts, to name a few of the potential use cases.
	But it's not just that.
	Of course, we've seen, I've shown you, the pictures of OpenAI's ChatGPT robot.
	They used ChatGPT in a robot made by a company called Figure.
	And you've seen that. That was the one that had the California dude accent.
	Oh, yeah. Like, yeah, kind of voice when it was talking to people.
	But it was thinking. I mean, it had a noticeable pause.
	But other than that, it was very impressive.
	Lenovo that makes laptops has just introduced a six-legged robot that looks like the Boston Dynamics RoboDogs, or the ones that the Chinese are using, instead of putting a machine gun on its back, they gave it another pair of legs.
	And the interesting thing is what they said it was designed for.
	A six-legged RoboDog that is designed, Lenovo says, quote, for comprehensive data collection.
	This is what it looks like.
	It's just an extra set of things.
	But it's got another camera type of thing that's up on the top of it.
	I wonder what that means when they say that it is designed for comprehensive data collection.
	Well, see, all of this stuff is about surveillance.
	All of it is about a police state and surveillance.
	And it's everything that they do is about collecting data on us.
	Wine Press News has a report over half of the internet is AI-generated garbage.
	Yeah. And fear grows of the dead internet theory.
	Oh, that's interesting.
	The dead internet.
	You know, we may see that chat GPT and artificial intelligence ushers in the Tower of Babel effect.
	You know, this whole thing, I think, is a house of cards.
	And this is...
	Kind of related, but not exactly the same thing as what I've talked about before in terms of the mad cow type of disease.
	A lot of people said that once artificial intelligence runs out of human data and starts consuming the garbage that it and other artificial intelligence generators have put out on the internet, that it'll essentially have the same kind of degenerative effect that cannibalism has.
	We see mad cow disease or the Yaakov Kreutzfeldt disease.
	But the dead internet theory was posited years ago, says Wine Press News, by people in forums that believe that the internet is quickly being replaced by bots and that it is run and controlled by artificial intelligence.
	The theory further alleges that the internet died in 2016.
	And that what the world has now is really being run by the U.S. government.
	And basically everything people are encountering and interacting with is just AI-generated content.
	Where would they get that idea?
	Did they use social media?
	It seems like everything that you encounter there is a bot that's put there, not just by the U.S. government, but by other governments as well.
	People act like bots, and so it's kind of hard to make a distinction between a human bot and a bot bot.
	Futurism magazine reported in January that close to 60% of the Internet already consists of Internet slime scraped from the recesses of the World Wide Web and is rapidly being copied by AI algorithms, which therefore has given the dead Internet theory some credit.
	Vice reported that a recent study conducted by researchers at the Amazon Web Services, AI Lab, found that a shocking amount of the web is already made out of poor quality AI-generated and translated content.
	The paper, according to the study, over half, specifically 57.1%.
	Of all the sentences on the internet have been translated into two or more other languages.
	The poor quality and the staggering scale of these translations suggest that large language model-powered AI robots were used to both create and translate the material.
	Creating it. Not just translating it, but creating it as well.
	57%. We're 57% there now.
	Who knows? When are we going to get to the...
	The herd immunity for artificial intelligence attacking us with this stuff.
	Yeah, they're going to make the internet unusable, just like they're going to make the power grid unusable.
	But it will still be useful for them for their primary purpose, which is propaganda.
	And no matter if they take this thing over 100%, Do the censorship, do the propaganda, do the surveillance of us, biometric surveillance and everything else using the cameras.
	That's the key thing that it's for.
	It's recognizing patterns and matching those patterns, and that's precisely what they want with the police surveillance state.
	But it's also the censorship and the propaganda aspects of it.
	And the question is, will your fellow citizens...
	Will they fall for it, thinking that it's real?
	When I look at what happened in 2020, and I look at the response of people to what happened in 2020, the fact that they can't get their head around what really happened and who was responsible for it, and this kind of double-think in terms of, well, I really hate the vaccine, but I love Trump, These people literally loathe the vaccine.
	They believe that it was a mass murder, the rollout of this stuff.
	And yet they love the guy who bragged about being its creator.
	So do you think these people are going to be able to figure this stuff out?
	I really don't. Well, the research is believed to be a ploy to garner clickbait-driven ad revenue.
	AI is being used to first generate poor quality English language content at a remarkable scale.
	And then AI-powered machine translation tools to transcribe the content into several other languages.
	The translated material gets worse each time, and as a result, entire regions of the web are filling to the brim with degrading AI-scrambled copies of copies.
	This is the mad cow disease that is there.
	So we can look at this, and perhaps they will be hoisted by their own petard, blown up by their own bomb.
	Well, we'll see what happens with it.
	I mean, certainly when we look at what is happening in the financial world and the Federal Reserve and the central banks, it seems to me that they're going to be blown up by their own bombs.
	But we'll talk more about that with Tony Arterman, who is here and ready to come on.
	So we're going to take a quick break and we're going to get Tony Arterman on and see what he saw.
	He was at the convention.
	He wasn't with us last week.
	He was at the big Bitcoin convention in Nashville.
	Where Trump presented himself as the savior of Bitcoin.
	So we'll see what Tony has to say about that, as well as other economic issues.
	We're going to take a break. We'll be right back.
	♪♪
	the
	Joining us now is Tony Ardobin of Wise Wolf Gold.
	Tony has set up davidknight.gold to take you there.
	And again, you can buy gold, silver, small or large quantities.
	You can also join a buying group to save money on a monthly basis.
	You can determine how much you want to set aside.
	And you can start to save gold and silver and get that group discount.
	It's called Wolfpack.com.
	You can also find that at wisewolf.gold, or you can go to davidknight.gold and let him know that you came through us.
	So joining us now is Tony Arterman.
	Good to see you and talk to you, Tony.
	You were busy last week. Tell us a little bit about that.
	Yes, sir. Well, thanks for having me back, as always.
	Yeah, I was at the Bitcoin conference in Nashville.
	My son, Houston, and I went and stayed from Wednesday through Saturday.
	And, wow, you know, I had never been to one of the conferences before.
	And I just kind of took it for granted.
	I've been in the space since 2016.
	And even Trump mentioned in his speech about, you know, when he took office, Bitcoin was around $800.
	And then when he left office, it was $35,000.
	And I said, well, actually, you know, I was thinking back 2016, you know, during the election year, it was down to like $350 a coin, I remember, because I was buying it.
	And I didn't have a lot of money.
	And everything I had, I put into a Bitcoin ATM. And just thinking about how different the space is now, David, It's such a monumental shift that I think we take it for granted that you have not only a former president, you have Donald Trump, of course, running for president, nominee of a major party.
	You have RFK Jr.
	There was senators.
	This is something that I guess I just knew that they were talking about.
	I knew it was on the radar. I anticipated Trump was going to mention something about using it as a strategic reserve asset.
	But having RFK Jr.
	up there, being very specific about what strategy he would use as president to buy Bitcoin for a reserve asset for the United States, he was saying he'd buy 550 Bitcoin a day.
	He would order the Treasury to buy 550 Bitcoin a day until it reached 4 million in holdings, which would be 19% or so of the world's supply of Bitcoin, which is he wanted to put on parity with our Supposedly what we hold in gold.
	I mean, you and I have had that conversation many times.
	I'm not sure what we hold.
	I'm not sure what we have an accounting of.
	But it really is something to watch, David.
	I mean, this shift from Bitcoin being a subculture, a fringe thing that I got into in 2016 to all of these dignitaries and political candidates.
	And now you have, this is something that in the Bitcoin community they call game theory.
	Where they've, you know, mapped out what would happen, you know, eventually when Bitcoin becomes scarce and the price goes up and it's more valuable that governments start fighting over Bitcoin dominance.
	I'm not sure I subscribe to that completely, but it is...
	It's a crazy thing to watch, and I got to see that.
	I got to see Edward Snowden speak, and I was really proud of my son.
	He was really just getting into this.
	Look, I'm a gold and silver precious metals guy, and I got to watch Michael Saylor give his presentation.
	One of the things that Michael Saylor put up that I found really interesting, I'd never seen it put that way, but he had it on the screen, a big screen, and he put up all the assets in the world markets.
	And, you know, by, you know, by degree, you know, like so hundreds and hundreds of trillions.
	And up in the very left hand corner, little tiny spikes, little tiny reference points was gold.
	And then behind that was silver and then Bitcoin.
	So like the rest of the world, like what do you consider assets or stocks or currency or whatever?
	So up in the very left-hand corner was the actual money.
	And so I thought this is an unsustainable model as well because everything, you know, you talked about before we went live on your show, you were talking about the governments of the world's central banks really hoisting themselves up by their own petard.
	Yes. We live in an age of fakes.
	There's so much debt, so much liquidity, And again, without value.
	So we live in an inverse, it's upside down, and I think that's what a lot of this...
	I think political movements in the Bitcoin space.
	It is really weird.
	I don't just swallow it whole because back in January, I gave a little talk on my stream.
	I said, BlackRock and Larry Fink are now pushing Bitcoin because of these ETFs.
	So I have mixed emotions on that because Larry Fink doesn't like gold.
	So what's the deal about Bitcoin?
	So there's a lot of open questions.
	But I do think just this monumental movement, it really is crazy to watch, David, the shift away from the subculture quarter into accepted reality for finances.
	Yeah, when we talk about the chart from Saylor, it is very much like the dead Internet theory, that basically the Internet has been taken over with phony stuff from the government, and that's what they've done to the financial system, isn't it?
	Yes. It's all built on fake.
	I've never seen...
	I'd have to maybe get a copy or screenshot it for you.
	I just was sitting there with my son and I go, just look at that.
	I've never seen just all of the amount of currency and debt and what they consider assets, but those could be paper assets and stock markets and exchanges and other things that really...
	Don't hold value if it's not, you know, real assets, whether it's real estate or tangible something.
	And so those were relegated to a very, very remote corner of the financial map.
	So I don't think there's not enough real to go around in this world of fake.
	And so when you look at it, you know, my take on Larry Fink is, as he's talking about all this stuff, and he really is, I don't know if it's so much Bitcoin as it is ETF stuff.
	Because when he's talking about it, he actually makes ETF a verb.
	He wants to ETF everything.
	In a sense, that's like making everything a derivative.
	Of course he would like that.
	That's what these people have done. They create these fake derivative financial instruments.
	That gives them the kind of leverage to do this.
	That's where all this fake stuff comes from.
	It comes from these derivatives that are out there.
	And I think he sees a whole new area.
	Of, you know, crypto fakeness and crypto derivatives using the ETF stuff.
	That's the thing that concerns me about it.
	But what do you think about all these politicians?
	I mean, they've got their agenda.
	Of course, there's a lot of people that are making contributions to politicians like Tom Emmer.
	He supports it because he's getting, not because he wants to have honest money, but because he's getting a lot of contributions from people I think that the Bitcoin thing, it's good for us to have alternatives to the monopolized fake system that the government has.
	But I also suspect the motives of these politicians.
	Was anything said about CBDC by Trump since Jared Kushner...
	Was plotting the beginning of CBDC there with Steve Mnuchin, Trump's Treasury Secretary, when Trump was in office.
	What did Trump say about CBDC? Yeah, conveniently, nobody brings that up, you know, when Trump starts talking about CBDC. But yeah, he did mention in his talk, he said, and there'll never be a CBDC while I'm president.
	You know, so, like there's not a wall either.
	But yeah, the whole thing with him and his promises, I just...
	I was more interested in, again, I don't think Trump believes any of this.
	I think he was literally, the way that the speech went, it looked like he was reading it for the first time.
	Like, if you watch him go over the stats on Bitcoin being at the market cap relative to silver, and he says, it surpassed silver.
	Wow! He kind of takes it like, that's wow, like he's reading it for the first time.
	Like, oh wow, that's pretty amazing.
	Maybe it'll reach gold, you know, like what he starts going into.
	No, he did mention that, and some of the other politicians, that was another thing that I thought was, I just didn't expect it.
	I guess I've been paying attention, but maybe that escaped me, but there really is a lot more political involvement In Bitcoin, just again, the difference between where it was and what Bitcoin has originated and where it is now, I think it's got a story to tell.
	There is going to be a lot more that comes out of this with Bitcoin, but I think we have to watch these politicians very closely.
	What are they actually trying to do?
	I mean, you mentioned Larry Fink, and I've wondered, what's the scenario here?
	What's the endgame? You're right.
	He doesn't talk about you owning Bitcoin.
	Bitcoin yourself with your own keys.
	He's talking about ETFs.
	That's right. And he's talking about controls.
	Yeah, I think his play is derivatives, yeah.
	Yes. I think there's something that, of course, in BlackRock's connection because of Trump to the Fed, to the central bank, again, you know, if a president ordered the Treasury to start buying Bitcoin, what would the Federal Reserve do?
	You know, would it be akin to JFK's executive order on silver, which RFK Jr.
	mentioned, by the way.
	So I thought that was interesting.
	What do you say about it? Well, he just mentioned that his uncle had signed an executive order on silver, wanting to make it somewhat of a permanent monetary class asset.
	And that, you know, after he was assassinated, all the silver was taken out of the coinage.
	So it's something that, you know, again, those of us that recognize the conspiracy theory of history, that's a direct correlation of, you know, JFK, along with Abraham Lincoln, Like him or not, those are the only two presidents that printed notes direct from the Treasury.
	And they were both shot in the head in public to channel Jim Mars.
	But yeah, that's something that I think directly correlates to JFK having been an enemy to the Federal Reserve.
	He was very skeptical of the Fed's power.
	He was very specific about how he would accumulate a big Bitcoin reserve.
	Did he have any other specifics about things that he talked about, CBDC? That's specific.
	He did talk about CBDC, and his transformation really came down to being involved in the strike, the Canadian trucker's strike, a couple years ago.
	And he said when he saw that, when he saw that the Canadian government's overreach and being able to freeze accounts and go after people as enemies at the stage just for peacefully protesting, he looked at alternatives and found Bitcoin.
	He's very specific.
	You know, I don't think, RFK Jr.
	wasn't pandering. He had really, I think, thought this through.
	It seemed very strategic on his part.
	So, of all the people there, I found him to be the most interesting to watch.
	And, of course, you know, Trump did come in.
	He didn't, obviously, go as far, anywhere near as far as RFK Jr.
	But just the mere fact that they're there, And this, in this space, and then you got this type of spotlight being shown on it.
	I did think, too, David, it's interesting that it's, for whatever reason, partisan.
	I mean, you got mostly, it's mostly Republicans that are, you know, for Bitcoin or touting Bitcoin, which I find bizarre.
	Then, of course, you know, RFK Jr.
	is an independent candidate.
	So it really highlights that there is some difference in the And the parties there, I don't trust either one of the parties, as you know.
	I don't cheerlead either one of them, but it is weird that it is somewhat partisan.
	And of course, I forget specifics of it, but immediately after all this talk about having Bitcoin as a reserve, The Biden administration did a massive move on Bitcoin that they hold.
	I forget, maybe you know the specifics of it.
	But in a way, as a kind of counter and defiance to that, showing that the gist of it was they wanted to send a signal that they're still at war with Bitcoin and crypto in general, right?
	Yeah, absolutely. So one analyst called it tone deaf.
	I don't think it's tone deaf at all.
	I think it was in direct defiance of, you know, any kind of future policy.
	There's 200,000 Bitcoin held by the DOJ, which were all seized assets.
	For people and civil asset forfeiture, you know, or Silk Road or other things like that with Ross Ulbrich.
	So yeah, they moved that.
	That's not a coincidence at all.
	It was moved into an unknown wallet, from a known wallet into an unknown wallet.
	So they're just doing that just to showcase, and you're exactly right, that they're still in charge, that there is a war on crypto and private assets.
	This is weird. The tomb of the unknown wallet is where they put it.
	We don't know where it is.
	But also, you mentioned Ross Ulbricht, and Trump mentioned Ross Ulbricht.
	He had an opportunity to pardon, but he didn't.
	I remember there was a concerted effort by Ross's mom, Lynn, who I've talked to many times to try to get him to pardon, but you know, on his, as he's leaving office, he only pardoned white collar criminals that Jared knew from Israel or whatever.
	I mean, it was basically, it was that bad.
	He didn't want to pardon Snowden or Assange or Ross Ulbricht, but he did mention that he would pardon Ross Ulbricht.
	And again, that is a newfound issue for him, I guess, in the context that Ross Ulbricht is something of a placeholder for the Bitcoin community, because one of the reasons that they railroaded him and gave him consecutive life sentences so he could never get parole was to send a signal about Bitcoin.
	wasn't it? Well, that's exactly right.
	They were handing out t-shirts at the event, and it was like, Free Ross, you know, Vote Trump.
	Those are free.
	Better late than never, and there's a lot of hope.
	Oh, by the way, I think I may have to pause my mic here.
	We've got the train going by my house here in Tennessee, Texas, David.
	It's pretty loud. You may have to come back to me here in about two minutes if you don't mind.
	That's okay. I don't hear anything with it yet, but we'll let you know.
	Well, you will. I live right next to the train track in an old house built in the 40s.
	There you go. You can hear the train.
	It's a lot of fun. I don't hear it.
	You hear it there, but we don't hear it over the microphone.
	Oh, okay. Well, that's good.
	Normally, it's a pretty loud event.
	I have to pause it whenever I'm broadcasting.
	Okay. Yeah. But yeah, they were giving out free shirts and they offered me one and I felt bad for them.
	Again, Trump was already president and I can't suspend disbelief long enough to go, oh yeah, as soon as he's like, well maybe that's the case.
	Maybe they've broken through. Maybe he has had some kind of change in policy that's advantageous now.
	And a lot of things had to happen for that to take place.
	So I really do hope that he does pardon Ross and that that And that happens.
	But when I see things like that, it's very partisan.
	Vote Trump, he's going to do this and that.
	There was a lot of people there in the MAGA movement because it's $1,000 a ticket to get into the general seating.
	So it wasn't like a huge MAGA rally, but it was very, very busy, very packed.
	Well, that's interesting, and it'll be interesting to see what happens.
	So, how do you take things?
	And, of course, there's been such a crazy election cycle.
	Since we've last talked, so many things have happened.
	So what do you think?
	I mean, you think that...
	I know everybody was cheering on Trump because he's now thrown his hat in on the side of Bitcoin as it's become a political dividing line now.
	But how do you see this?
	Do you think we're too far away to make any predictions?
	Or do you think that Trump is going to be able to pull it out with Lala Harris?
	I mean, she's pretty flaky, but again, she is for the most part a fresh face for a lot of these people.
	And you know, Trump's been around now for eight years.
	A lot of people really hate him.
	So I don't know what, how to make this, how to call this election, especially because we've got both sides are certain that their side is going to win.
	That's my real concern is that it's going to trigger violence, perhaps even a civil war who knows how they'll use it and how they're setting this thing up.
	What's your general take on the election?
	We don't usually talk that much about politics, but since we're talking about Trump and the Bitcoin conference, what's your take on it?
	Well, prior to Biden getting out, I felt like it's pretty much a negativity that Trump would be reelected or re-selected.
	I don't know now.
	There's a wild card there.
	And the thing is, I don't think that...
	Kamala Harris is necessarily going to get a lot more votes than Joe Biden would have.
	I think that our politics are defined now by demographics.
	I think that's what a lot of people...
	I don't even know why anybody would study political science anymore.
	All you have to do is shift the demographics to like a Californian and you just have a ruling class.
	It doesn't matter.
	You can run a dead person as long as there's a D there.
	Then you win. I mean...
	Once an area goes demographically blue, does it turn back red?
	That doesn't happen.
	Only red states turn purple and then blue.
	Blue states don't go red.
	When I was a kid in Texas, the Democratic Party was still very prominent.
	This was LBJ country.
	Blue dog Democrats.
	And you remember Ann Richards was governor back in the early 90s.
	She was eventually defeated by...
	Somehow a very cogent George W. Bush.
	And if you look at those old tapes, how is that guy?
	Is he the same guy that was president?
	Nobody told him to act dumb yet, I guess.
	Ann Richards was a Democrat.
	She was governor of Texas. It was very much a Democratic...
	A blue dog Democrat state.
	You know, it turned into the, and I'm with you, I disdain the red-blue identifiers.
	I know what that PSYOP is, but it turned into a Republican state, and, you know, now it's Republican.
	And that doesn't happen with, that doesn't happen anymore.
	It doesn't happen with, you know, it's not going to happen, a state's not going to go from a blue state to a deep-rooted state or anything like that.
	So I think what we're really going to watch here is It's an actual campaign, which I think Trump's running somewhat of a campaign, versus what Kamala Harris is going to run, which is just demographics.
	I mean, they're just going to, the key points, the identifiers for those people that vote that way, and it doesn't matter what her policies are going to be.
	It doesn't matter what her politics are.
	It doesn't matter, even if she has a gaffe, I don't think that really...
	We're just not in the same country anymore.
	This is not 1984, Reagan versus Mondale, where Reagan can get a 48-state landslide.
	It doesn't work that way.
	People are already drawing their lines of where they are.
	The Republican Party and Trump's base is shrinking.
	It's not growing. It's a shrinking base, unfortunately, because of the things that the Republican Party have done to this country, whether it's outsourcing jobs or insourcing people and not doing anything about the border, mass immigration.
	I mean, we import a million legal immigrants a year.
	That's not illegal immigration.
	It's just regular immigration, and 80% of all new immigrants vote Democrats.
	So 800,000 new Democrats a year, just regardless.
	That's not counting the factories and universities that turn out left-wing young adults all over the country, and school systems and television and culture.
	So the cards are stacked against anybody that carries anything of a conservative mantle.
	And I don't know, Trump's still not really running on anything substantive.
	It's more like a cult of personality.
	I mean, we have the assassination attempt that garnered him a lot, the iconic photos But still, policy.
	I haven't heard policy, you know, except things that are alarming, like the trade war stuff.
	So, I don't know, David.
	I really, I think it's a toss-up at this point.
	And if Kamala Harris would, you're right, though, about the fallout would be tremendous.
	For those, I mean, if you're in the MAGA camp right now, and you're wearing that hat, and you really think, you know, Trump's the second coming and all that, like, You're going to think it was stolen, and it might have been.
	I don't know. But you're definitely not going to believe anything.
	And the same thing goes for the other side.
	Like, how can the first, you know, Indian, black, you know, prosecutor lady, whatever she is, how can she lose to this buffoon, right?
	Yeah, that's right. So both sides.
	And both sides are tribal.
	everybody's dug in, but I do think like it's, you know, Biden in 2020, he doesn't have to fill a room. He doesn't have to fill a stadium. He doesn't have to have boat parades and all this other stuff. He just has the votes. That's right. You know, and that's, that's how demographics work. And it's how the electronic voting stuff works as well. I've spent a lot of time talking about that this last week and you know it is just yet another, so many different ways that they can rig the election. And I thought it was very telling.
	When you look at Venezuela, they immediately knew that it was a rigged election.
	How? Well, they used Edison Research, the same people that do it for all the news organizations here in the U.S., and they ran exit polls, and they looked at the exit polls versus the official reports, and they said, yeah, this is rigged.
	And that's how the State Department has always assessed whether or not a foreign election is honest or not.
	So why didn't either the Republicans or the Democrats Use it to prove their point with the 2020 election.
	I think it's because they're both breaking the election.
	It's a hacking contest in a number of different ways.
	And so that's why I think it really is impossible to figure out what is going on with it.
	But everybody is invested in it, as you pointed out.
	And I think they want it that way.
	They want people fighting each other over the election result.
	Whichever way it goes, they'll be able to do that.
	So I think we're coming in for some difficult times politically as well as economically.
	When we look at this, Tony, in terms of CBDC and the rest of the stuff, Europe is going full on.
	They've got five countries that are doing the vaccine passport thing, and they've continued to develop this.
	They're rolling it out, doing their beta test sites at five different countries.
	They're talking about a digital euro.
	And how it's going to be their option for electronic payments and all the rest of the stuff I mean, it's it's moving into that there. It's kind of on the side burner here in the US Hall we got the election, but I think they're gonna ramp that up pretty quickly Of course next year after the election real ID comes in and it is going to be required to fly it's gonna be you know, they're gonna Bring it on in force after the election and I think these next four years
	It's going to be a real fight regardless of who they select to be the president It's going to be a real fight for the last four years to take us into this 2030 dystopia that they've been planning a long time.
	I couldn't agree more.
	It's akin to World War II when they set up Patton to look like, to fame that looked like the Third Reich was, he was going to come in from the channel and they built up all the fake, even like inflatable tanks and other things.
	You know, that's what the election is.
	Yeah. The election is, have all of us looking over here, looking at this thing that really doesn't matter.
	I mean, it really doesn't.
	At the end of the day, if there's no real substantive policy differences, not really.
	You know, those who are in control, which is the multinationals and central banksters, that's really who's controlling most of this in our politics.
	But it's just a head fake.
	The Agenda 2030 Great Reset marches on.
	That's what we have to pay attention to.
	The world's changing. It's changing rapidly.
	Neither one of these candidates are talking about de-dollarization.
	Not any real...
	Not with any real clout.
	And they're not going into debt.
	They're not doing anything that touches the real problems here of this waning power in the United States, the empire, the infrastructure coming apart and our standing in the world, all of that economically.
	It's, again, very fragile.
	It's a fragile system.
	I mean, look at the crowd strike.
	Issue that happened, what, 10 days ago.
	And how everything was affected all across the board.
	Very fragile system.
	And we've got tripwires for wars all over the globe.
	And I don't like to just get into, like, oh, it's just a dark time ahead.
	But there's a lot of challenges ahead.
	And, again, our politics are just a distraction.
	Maybe 20 years ago we'd been talking about what's affecting people.
	But now it's just a cult of personality.
	I like what Edward Snowden said at the Bitcoin event.
	He said, go vote, but don't join a cult.
	I mean, he said it like five times.
	He's like, you can go vote.
	He's like, vote. You know, vote your conscience, but don't join a cult.
	Good. That's what a lot of this has become.
	And, you know, it was really sad. I went in to go watch the Trump speech in the actual auditorium.
	And, of course, it took like an hour to get in there.
	And I got there early in the morning with my son.
	And then about two or three hours into the talks, my son's like, I need to get some more coffee.
	So he got out and he's like, I can't get back in.
	So I just left.
	I'm like, I'll just listen to it outside.
	I walked around the expo.
	I didn't miss anything. But you could, you know, anytime a speaker would mention, you know, before Trump went on stage, anytime a speaker would mention that Trump had been anti-Bitcoin, anti-crypto in the past, The crowd booed heavily, and I thought maybe for a second they were booing that he was.
	No, it's the fact that somebody brought it up.
	Yes, exactly.
	You're not supposed to notice it, and it really is a cult.
	It's a cult.
	Yeah, and we all know it.
	As Snowden is saying, keep it at arm's length.
	But they have bought into this thing, and that's what's dangerous.
	That's the thing about this election that scares me, not the outcome, because they're both controlled by a lot of the same forces.
	What bothers me is how they have used this to essentially create a competition, chaos, a civil war over these personalities.
	It's not even over the issues, it's over the personalities.
	It's over the personalities.
	It's a real shame. And again, we have to do our best.
	We have to cover some of this.
	As Sun Tzu said, no, you're enemy.
	We have to have intel. But that's not really what's going on here.
	There's much larger issues that we face here as a country.
	And I agree with you on electronic voting.
	You have to start there.
	Don Jeffries did a great job in Hidden History covering something called Vote Scam.
	I recommend anybody go look into that.
	There was a pair of brothers that really researched electronic voting and vote tallying back in the late 80s and early 90s.
	Go check out Don Jeffries' work on that in Hidden History.
	And it's really eye-opening because we don't have true accounting.
	And especially when you do something electronically, you're right.
	They could be just like... It's like who has the best hackers?
	Yes, it is. I said that after 2016 because I talked a great deal about electronic voting.
	Not specifically about any particular company like Smartmatic or Dominion.
	There's also ES&S. But it's just electronic voting in general and how vulnerable it is.
	I said, you know, you can cheat with anything.
	But when you've got electronic voting...
	It allows people to stuff the ballot from anywhere in the world.
	They don't have to be there physically.
	They don't have to have an agent that's there physically.
	They can do it from anywhere. And so you've opened up your system to bad actors from all over the world, and that's the real issue for it.
	And, you know, you look at the history of Venezuela.
	These, you know, Chavez and all the rest of these people, they have been able to maintain the power of this socialist party by using these...
	This electronic voting machine.
	So that's the other part of it.
	And so when I look at it, it isn't so much that I say, well, you know, who's got the better story about issues or the more likable personality or who's got the most boxes checked on the intersectionality ranking thing here?
	But who is it that the system would like to have?
	And how are they going to use this person?
	And that's what really scares me about the cult that has been developed around this.
	That's what really scares me.
	I think that's the way that this election is going to be used.
	They don't even pretend to have an election anymore.
	I mean, it's just a selection.
	And everybody can see that, but they're still drawn in as a cult.
	It's amazing to me. Yeah, we've just suspended all thinking.
	All critical thinking has been suspended due to partisanship.
	That's where you just leave your brain.
	Unfortunately, that's where people go now.
	They're very partisan.
	We're dug in on those lines, and it's just getting more and more entrenched.
	I was on a show yesterday, and he says, well, he's a conservative Catholic, and he said, well, I get in a lot of trouble because I don't just necessarily follow Trump.
	You know, I could criticize Trump.
	I said, oh, you just lost a lot of money, too.
	Yeah. That's how all of this works.
	Just being in that crowd, though, these are people who are supposed to be free-thinking Bitcoiners, skeptical of the central power, central bank, skeptical of fiat currency.
	I mean, you don't travel that far and spend that kind of money to go and sit in a conference and listen to Bitcoin if you haven't thought some of those issues through.
	But when it came up to Trump, there was just a ton of people there booing anyone who said anything, even if it's repeating what he said.
	Yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, it's amazing.
	Absolutely amazing. I've never seen anything like it in all these years.
	It truly is a cult. Talk to us a little bit about what you think is going to happen with interest rates and gold as you're looking at the Federal Reserve.
	I've been talking about, you know, these long-term issues, regardless of why it happens in the short term before the election.
	When we look at the long-term issues, Janet Yellen is down at the entrance to the Amazon, essentially, you know, the last gas station before you get into the Amazon, I guess.
	They're having this conference.
	She says, we've got to spend $78 trillion in the next 20 years to save the planet.
	And the bulk of that is going to come from the U.S. And it's going to be like a big COVID MacGuffin thing annually just over this climate griff thing.
	And, of course, they're going to pile this up into massive debt.
	But at the same time, as soon as Trump mentions, well, let's not tax Social Security or something, they trot out the Congressional Budget Office to say we don't have the money for that.
	But they got the money for the climate MacGuffin.
	And it's going to be massive inflation.
	They're going to keep going into debt until they do collapse it.
	They'll do it over the green agenda, if nothing else.
	But what do you see in terms of short term, in terms of interest rate changes?
	It reminded me of when I first went on air on the radio 11 years ago, and there was an article about how they had shortfalls for the veterans' budget for the VA and having a hard time.
	They're going to need to have so much more, and they couldn't find it.
	It wasn't in the budget, and I just went through all the foreign aid, and I was like, well, here we go.
	I just went live on air, and I was doing the calculations.
	I was like, let's just cut out this country, this country, this country, and I go, there's your shortfall.
	Okay. Of course they don't have anything that actually helps America.
	They won't have anything that helps our infrastructure, that makes us stronger, that improves our society.
	The ruling class are absentee landlords.
	They're literally going to flee the sinking ship.
	The Treasury is being looted.
	I saw an article today on Kitco.
	The debt has passed $35 trillion.
	So, $35 trillion.
	It was $1 trillion the year of my birth.
	No, not quite $2 trillion.
	It reached in in 1980.
	So, again, now we go $1 trillion in debt every 90 to 100 days.
	The wheels are off. So, of course, you can promise anything.
	I mean, you're looting the Treasury. It doesn't matter.
	You've got this fake system.
	And we're inside a real-time experiment.
	Since 1971, Richard Nixon takes us off the gold standard of free-floating fiat currency.
	The average lifespan is 26 years for that currency.
	We've doubled that. So we're inside an experiment.
	I don't see any other way to describe it.
	And these wonky policy people that were tools for the World Economic Forum and Davos and the UN, of course they're going to come up with crazy numbers.
	I mean, remember this was...
	They were touting the Green New Deal, and AOC said, this is our World War II. Remember?
	This was something that she said.
	This is our World War II. What does that even mean?
	That's when we had a...
	Different times, you know, debt-to-GDP has come close to what we have now, and then it would dissipate and go back, and it's usually around 30%, 40%.
	That's like 130%, 140% of debt-to-GDP ratio.
	So none of these things are sustainable, and as de-dollarization continues, those who are paying attention, you know, You would serve yourself well by not buying into any, like, we're not going to be paying for that stuff.
	The ability for the Treasury of the United States to borrow endlessly and sell those bonds and other treasuries on the open market and hold them, I don't see, that's not going to be something that continues.
	As a matter of fact, I think it won't be, it probably won't be a triangulated swift death for the dollar, it would be more like a Like, you know, someone falling down the stairs.
	It won't be like you just jumped off a cliff.
	That's what I think, anyway.
	Or pushed down the stairs.
	But, yeah, it will be something like that.
	But those times aren't there.
	Here and now, they're just slowly starting to see the downturn in the purchasing power of the dollar and the money velocity start to slow.
	And those issues will come, and it will change our politics.
	I think a lot of that stuff will be off the table.
	It'll be about something akin to the Great Depression, where you have people who are going to have to have austerity measures and also be able to stop social unrest through food programs and other things like that because it will have gotten so bad.
	I agree. Yeah.
	One other thing I wanted to ask you, I just thought about the Bitcoin thing.
	Did he bring up the Federal Reserve directly, Trump, or did RFK Jr.?
	I imagine maybe RFK Jr.
	did, but did they bring up the Federal Reserve or did they just talk about Bitcoin and what they would like to do?
	Mostly the Bitcoin.
	I'd have to go back to the transcript of RFK Jr.
	I know he's much more substantive, and he had actual policy.
	I do believe he did mention the Federal Reserve, and I think that was in correlation to, and I'll see if I can get the transcript for you, what he mentioned about his uncle's...
	He did mention his uncle, JFK, was skeptical of I don't believe Trump mentioned anything about the Fed.
	I mean, he did mention CBDC. Seriously, David, I think he was reading the speech for the first time when he was up there.
	He looked at it and was like, oh, wow, silver?
	Really? Market cap is silver?
	I don't think he really...
	He really knew anything about Bitcoin going into that.
	I get that impression every time I see him speaking.
	He's reading the speech.
	I mean, he had, you know, one of the big issues in 2016 was Obamacare.
	And somebody had written up a great paper that was on the Trump campaign website.
	And I spent time talking about it.
	I said, well, this is really good if he's got people who are going to push this thing through.
	I know Trump hasn't mentioned it.
	He doesn't really care about it if he even knows about it.
	But maybe his staff is going to push.
	Well, as soon as he got elected...
	That was deep-sixed.
	You know, memory hold off of his website.
	So, yeah, I mean, while I look at the policy statements of Trump, I'm pretty cynical that anything's going to be done.
	But it is interesting to see, as you point out, the political divide around that.
	But I just, you know, I like the anonymity, the physical aspect of the metals and things like that.
	That's what I think is really important.
	And the more I look at the Internet, the more it looks...
	Looks like a fiat currency.
	It's like fiat information now at this point.
	What's going on at Wise Wolf?
	Well, the same as always, just continuing to create a supply chain for my customers and for Wolfpack members.
	I'm in Texas right now.
	I've got some appointments with the trading floor and garnering new supply the next week or so.
	Really, that's what I'm watching.
	I think that's what's going to separate all precious metals dealers in the next two, three, five years is going to be who can get supply.
	As I mentioned earlier in our talk, I mean, if you look at the chart of assets in the world, This giant, you know, chart in the little corner in the left-hand corner is gold, silver, and Bitcoin.
	So there's not enough real, you know, to house all the fake.
	And so there's going to be something that happens to all that fake.
	I mean, we're talking about an unprecedented amount of debt creation, currency creation.
	There's 52 times more currency on Earth today than when I was born today.
	And that's fake currency, by the way.
	These aren't notes backed up by anything.
	You can't trade them in for a commodity.
	They're just rapidly losing purchasing power.
	So I'm setting up supply, David, and we're looking to continue to grow Wolfpack.
	I will say I'll have an announcement maybe next week.
	If you're interested in buying Bitcoin, Wise Wolf Bitcoin will be operational here in the next week or two.
	You can just go direct with me if you want to buy a coin.
	And we're setting that up.
	There's a whole bunch of things I've got to hoop, so I've got to jump through.
	I used to be in the Bitcoin ATM business, and we sold that a couple years ago because of the regulations.
	It had gotten crazy. Yeah.
	I decided I'm going to bring that back to Wise Wolf.
	As a matter of fact, within the next week, we should be able to accept Bitcoin for one-time purchases, and I'm not going to charge a fee.
	So if you've got Bitcoin and you want to buy precious metals, we'll be the only gold and silver broker that I know that does not charge a fee to use your Bitcoin.
	So we'll make it really convenient for people to be able to use their BTC. That's...
	That's what's new, and I don't have it all in place yet, but I'm working on it, so I should be able to make an announcement here in the next week or two.
	Wow, that'd be a great way to get physical.
	Yeah, you know, when we look at, I was just thinking about, you know, As he's talking about how focused he is on ETFs, and I spent time last couple of days talking about how J.P. Morgan had used the ETFs for silver and for gold to manipulate on behalf of the government.
	And I'm sure that's what Fink is looking at.
	You know, how can I manipulate Bitcoin?
	Well, I can use an ETF, and I can do the same thing that J.P. Morgan's been doing with gold and silver.
	I can do that with Bitcoin. I really do think that's where he said it.
	But, yeah, it's important to go direct.
	You know, get your Bitcoin direct.
	Get your silver and gold direct.
	Hold it. Get it outside of the virtual world.
	That whole infrastructure is getting so shaky, right?
	From our power infrastructure to cybersecurity issues that we see over and over again, as you mentioned before.
	Well, thank you for joining us, Tony.
	I really do appreciate you coming on.
	Thank you for your support for the program.
	And folks, if you want to find out more, you can get to Tony's Wise Wolf.
	You can do that with davidknight.gold and let him know that you came through us.
	Appreciate it, Tony. Thank you very much.
	Appreciate you, sir. Thank you. All right, folks, we're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back.
	Unlike most revolutions, where the people rise against a real economic oppression, in our case here in Boston, we are fighting for purely an abstract principle.
	It is, however, not nearly so abstract as the young gentleman supposes.
	The issue involved here is one of monopoly.
	Today the British government will monopolize the sale of tea in our country.
	Tomorrow it will be something else.
	I'm going to be a hero!
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Well, let's take a look at some of the things that are happening in the Olympics, because I do think it is interesting, because we're seeing both the tranny agenda going crazy, as well as elements of the green agenda in Paris.
	But there's also still fighting going back and forth about this opening ceremony.
	Barbara Butch is what this woman who is a self-described lesbian calls herself.
	She was the one who was at the center wearing the halo thing.
	She's now filed a legal complaint after she's gotten a lot of abuse online.
	Seems like the abuse can only go one direction.
	Target of yet another piece of cyber harassment, she said.
	See, she has free speech to mock and to parody, but other people don't.
	Her lawyer issued a letter announcing the filing of several complaints and says that they intend to prosecute anyone who tries to intimidate her in the future.
	I thought, oh, that's strange language.
	I mean, this is a lawyer. Prosecute is a different term than filing a complaint, a lawsuit, right?
	And yet, that is exactly what they are talking about doing.
	They filed a complaint, not so much that they filed a lawsuit against individuals, but they complained to the Paris prosecutor's office to prosecute people for their speech.
	You see, they can engage in free speech for them.
	They can offend people, but if you offend them, they're going to get the prosecutor on you.
	The police probe is expected to focus on messages based on religion and sexual orientation.
	What?
	What?
	They said that without any sense of irony.
	That was what was offensive about their opening ceremony, was their hateful messages about religion and their debauchery about sex.
	And yet, if you say anything about the essence of that, the religious aspect of it, or the sex aspect of it, then they can prosecute you.
	Butch is a self-proclaimed love activist who wore the silver headdress that resembled a halo, while flanked by drag artists, dancers, and others during the opening ceremony.
	To mock the Last Supper.
	And again, there's nothing sacred about a painting.
	It was da Vinci's idea of what he imagined it would look like.
	The paintings are not sacred, but it was really the debauchery, the deliberate mocking and hatred of the mean-spirited aspect of it combined with debauchery.
	And it was the government's participation in it.
	Because the Olympics is run by governments.
	Those are the things that I found offensive with it.
	I think a lot of people found that offensive.
	Again, there have been a lot of parodies and even mockery by the Simpsons and others, and it hasn't created this kind of outrage.
	The fact that the governments would fund this, run this, and think that it was okay.
	And we all know what they're doing in terms of elevating LGBT as a religion, especially the tranny aspect of this.
	And it's right there.
	You better not make any comments about their religion or their sexual orientation, or you will be prosecuted.
	The famous depiction of Christ and his apostles was seen...
	As being reimagined as bacchanalia involving drag queens, homosexuals, and transsexuals, said R.T. That's exactly right.
	Now, it's kind of interesting that people behind The Chosen, Dallas Jenkins, said, well, here's our image of the Last Supper.
	We thought we would give you our idea of how it looks.
	Here's the authentic image, he says.
	And here's what they came up with.
	Actually read the account of it, talking about John reclining on Jesus, leaning on Jesus, that type of thing.
	And I've seen that. There was a Mediterranean cuisine restaurant that Karen and I used to go to occasionally in Austin.
	And it was run by some people from the Middle East.
	I'm not sure exactly what ethnic group they were.
	But most of the restaurant did not have tables like this.
	All around the perimeter in one entire section, they had the kind of tables that people would use in the Middle East where they would sit on the floor and then kind of lean on one arm as they ate.
	And that's the way that it would have been done at the time of Jesus.
	So yeah, putting them on a table, it is interesting when people do these artistic things.
	One of the things I found interesting, you know, like I said, I don't I don't put any religious significance into Leonardo da Vinci's imaginings of what it looked like any more than I do Dallas Jenkins' imagination.
	But it used to be especially weird.
	You had, during the Dutch...
	Painters, when they were predominant, they would paint biblical scenes, and they would paint Abraham dressed up like a contemporary Dutchman and things like that.
	They absolutely had not been to the Middle East.
	They had not seen what any of that stuff looked like.
	They didn't have the flora or the fauna from that area.
	Nothing was authentic.
	And it was not really until...
	In the middle of the 1800s, the people really started going there from Europe.
	And then, at that time, they started doing archaeology.
	It had been around for so long that a big line of criticism of the Bible was that these are just made-up stories, and all these different nations that supposedly existed around, there was no evidence that they existed.
	Well, they'd not looked.
	And when they started to look, that line of criticism just disappeared.
	As a matter of fact, it went from being a line of criticism, oh, you just made up all these fairy stories.
	It went from that to really bolstering the account of the Bible.
	So the Chosen, they said, inspired fans with a truly biblical take on the transformational Well, I'm not quite so sure.
	You know, it's kind of interesting, too.
	There's been a lot of... Tommy Robinson was just arrested again by the police there because there's been a lot of anger about this knife attack on these young kids.
	And three young children killed.
	A teacher severely injured.
	And... Jordan Peterson did an interview with him, I think it was last week, talking about why the establishment hates Tommy Robinson so much.
	And at one point, Jordan Peterson just kind of abruptly stops.
	And he says, you know, do you know the story about the rich young ruler from the Gospels, is what he said?
	And Tommy Robinson didn't know, and I thought that was really interesting.
	No, never heard of it.
	I thought, really? Really? And so what that tells you is that, you know, he's not ever been associated with a church or anything.
	He wouldn't know any of that.
	And he goes, yeah, I think it applies to what you're talking about.
	Now, what Tommy Robinson was talking about was the fact that he had gotten involved politically and then there'd been a lot of pushback and things like that.
	And he thought, I just want to live my life.
	And so he said he moved.
	He got a new name, Tommy Robinson, not his real name.
	And he lived anonymously like that for about a year, and people left him alone until some reporter discovered where he was and then exposed it and made it out there.
	But he said, I just wanted to live my life and just have a successful business and some things like that.
	And that's when Jordan Peterson jumped in.
	That reminds me of the rich young ruler.
	And he had such a strange take on it.
	Jordan Peterson as well. At first I was surprised that Tommy Robinson had not even heard of it.
	I'm surprised at the biblical illiteracy of our society now, but it really has become post-Christian pagan.
	And then Jordan Peterson started to tell him the story and then interpret it for him.
	And the very first thing Jordan Peterson said, which...
	It was very much like you see with the chosen.
	I don't know if he saw this depicted on the chosen or whatever, but he says, so Jesus is riding along in a cart, and I thought, what?
	That's not part of the story.
	He walked everywhere.
	As far as I could tell, it seemed like he was always walking.
	And that was kind of the form of instruction that he and even Aristotle did that as well.
	It's called peripatetic instruction.
	He just kind of walk along with his disciples and and you know teach them as he's walking along That's essentially what is talked about in Deuteronomy 6 in terms of teaching your children You know as you walk with them in the way. You know you point out this you point out that you comment on life and kind of Explain to them using what is in front of you using current events and that type of thing, but He said so he's riding in this cart
	And the rich young yule jumps into the cart with him and they start talking.
	And it's like, this is getting interesting now.
	This is being reimagined by Jordan Peterson.
	And his bottom line is that it was something that was just too much sacrifice.
	And he didn't want to do it.
	That was what he took out of it to apply to him.
	And I thought, that's also kind of novel.
	I've never seen it that way before.
	I mean, you know, this is essentially a guy coming to him.
	And I'm saying, you know, what do I have to do to be saved?
	And so, you know, Jesus knew right away that he's trying to justify himself by his works.
	And so he says, well, you know, keep the commandments.
	Keep the Ten Commandments. I've done all that.
	It's like, oh yeah, you really have?
	You know, you haven't lied?
	I think you just lied right there.
	You know? And so then to show him as an example...
	That he hasn't kept the commandments.
	He says, sell everything you've got and follow me.
	Give it to the poor and follow me.
	Showing that he covets this stuff.
	That has become his God, his master.
	And so then he goes away.
	And that was a clever way of trying to explain to him what he was trusting in.
	That he had, in fact, violated these and that he wasn't going to be able to keep it.
	But I thought it was kind of interesting that Tommy Robinson had never heard of it.
	Jordan Peterson has got this, has reimagined it.
	Not only the specifics of it, but the overall point of it, I thought.
	It is strange.
	We do live in a strange time.
	And I think many of us need to understand, if you do understand that, I think you have to do whatever you can to try to get people focused on what is fundamentally important in our life.
	You see, the fundamentally important thing is not even...
	I admire Tommy Robinson for wanting to succeed and to work hard and to build himself up.
	That's all admirable stuff, but that's not really what life is about.
	What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his own soul?
	You see, we have lost as a society...
	Even the most fundamental elementary school, Bible school, Sunday school, shallow understanding of this stuff.
	We have become completely illiterate in the things of God.
	And that's why people are so apt to try things that are not really going to be good for us.
	I mean, we haven't even tried the peaceful things.
	Why would we want to start to get into the violent things?
	We haven't even given that a chance.
	A lot of times people will say, well, we've tried everything else.
	I guess we need to give it a prayer.
	Well, why don't you start with that instead?
	Anyway, getting to the trans religion of the Olympics.
	One example of this that the Daily Mail picked up, we were talking yesterday about the boxing.
	And in the context of the boxing, where they have sanctioned men beating up women as a sport.
	as a sport.
	It's just sick.
	It's ridiculous. And a female volleyball player, 17 years old, left paralyzed with brain damage by a tranny opponent.
	Who cackled with delight after knocking her to the ground.
	And she's speaking up about what is happening at the Olympics.
	Because you have both the Women's Boxing Association and the International Boxing Organization.
	Both of them were saying, no, no, we don't want to have men boxing women.
	But the Political Olympics Committee shut all that down.
	Pushed them out and said, no, we're going to do it.
	And so this woman was 17.
	She's now 19. The 5'11 trans player cackled in the light, McNabb said, after sending her to the floor, as did other players in the opposite team.
	She was left with brain damage and paralysis on her right side, which ended her dreams of getting a volleyball college scholarship and has even made it difficult to walk.
	She told the Daily Mail that it was disgusting that two boxers who failed gender tests had been cleared to fight women at this year's games in Paris.
	She fears that women could suffer injuries that are worse than hers.
	She said there's a biological difference between the two trans women and women.
	There is a difference in sports because of this in the first place.
	And where did we get this idea?
	Where did this begin to happen?
	The feminists have long denied, for 40 or 50 years, right?
	They were pushing this idea that women were equal to men in sports and all the rest of this stuff.
	We had the rigged tennis thing with Bobby Riggs and Billie Jean King.
	And as I pointed out before, even when he was a second or third rate tennis player, And he was retired and middle-aged.
	He had already beat a current practicing woman champion.
	And so then they set this thing up between Bobby Riggs and Billie Jean King.
	And the people around him said it was rigged.
	He was paid and all this stuff.
	And then after that, you had Jimmy Connors do a match again with a woman.
	And it wasn't close at all.
	And so the feminists have been setting this thing up for a very long time.
	And now the trannies have pushed this forward.
	It used to be illegal for men to beat up women, she said.
	And now people are putting it on TV and watching it.
	It is such a weird reality.
	Yeah. Yeah, such a weird reality.
	And you know that's kind of interesting because weird has now become...
	It's now become the gravitas of the left.
	I mention that because at one point somebody said something, and it was decades ago, politics.
	They said, so-and-so has gravitas.
	A strange word that nobody used, and then everybody started using it for a week or so.
	And so now... This label of weird has been put out there and applied to J.D. Vance.
	His weird ideas about women and family.
	Babylon Bee put it up this way.
	So, which of these two is weird?
	And they show on the left, Lala Harris with some guy who looks like he's seven feet tall.
	A mustache and makeup and dress like a woman.
	And on the other side, you have J.D. Vance and his wife holding two children.
	So which one of these two is weird?
	As a matter of fact, here is a supercut of all the people, all the Democrats, talking about weird, weird, weird.
	Some of what he and his running mate are saying, well, it's just plain weird.
	LAUGHTER These guys are just weird.
	That's who they are. As weird and creepy as J.D. Vance.
	A super weird idea from J.D. Vance.
	Yeah, it's not. I mean, it's quite weird.
	They're just plain weird. Just plain weird.
	Just plain weird.
	That stuff is weird. They come across weird, and then they start being weird.
	Yeah, they're weird. Being a really weird.
	He's such a weirdo. Donald Trump and his weirdo running mate.
	They're weird. Deeply and profoundly weird.
	They are weird. Weird. These Republicans just being weird.
	It's just weird. It's really weird.
	Republican weirdness goes even deeper.
	He said a lot of things that are weird.
	A weird style that he brings.
	Weird policies. Let's start with the weird thing, because it is a thing.
	Just plain weird. What was weird was talking about Diet Mountain Dew.
	Who drinks Diet Mountain Dew?
	Have you ever seen the guy laugh?
	That seems very weird to me that an adult can go through six and a half years of being in the public eye.
	If he has laughed, it's at someone, not with someone.
	That is weird behavior.
	Weird and cultish.
	These are weird people on the other side.
	He's kind of doubled down on his weird ideas.
	I think weird is probably generous.
	Simply weird. These guys are just plain weird.
	Dance as weird.
	You know, as the camp Trump and Vance So Sam,
	weird is the word here, in terms of initial impressions from Vance to the American public.
	Yeah, weird is the word.
	Isn't that amazing? They may not want to go there.
	Talking about throwing stones in a glass house.
	So, as I pointed out yesterday, there are two boxers.
	DNA tests have shown that they are men.
	One from Algeria, one from Taiwan.
	They're banned from competing by the Women's World Boxing Championships in March of last year.
	Because they're men.
	The International Boxing Association says they're men and they can't compete against women, but the International Olympics Committee says we're going to do it.
	It's not too weird. The North Carolina volleyball player that was struck in the face, that ball was traveling 70 miles an hour, they said, in the match back in September of 2022.
	The ball had been hit by the tall, thin, transgender player who towered over female teammates both on their side and in the opposition.
	Ms. McNabb was knocked unconscious for 30 seconds on the floor.
	Doctors diagnosed her with traumatic brain injury, concussion, partial paralysis on her right side, whiplash, and vision problems, which she says she's still dealing with today, almost two years later.
	She says she continues to struggle to move the right side of her body, leading her to regularly lose her balance and to suffer from falls.
	Her mental acuity is also damaged.
	She has to have hours of extra tutoring every month and extra time during tests because of the damage.
	And she has struggled with much more, much worse vision, anxiety and depression trying to recover from the injuries.
	The student who played volleyball, softball and basketball has also had her sporting career cut short.
	The major review carried out last year found that early exposure to testosterone in trans women, in other words, guys who then pass as a woman, means that they possess at least eight physical and mental attributes that could give them an advantage in sports.
	These men who say they're women...
	We're also shown to have greater muscle mass, bone density, as well as bigger lungs, higher oxygen levels in the blood, and increased connections in the area of the brain responsible for spatial awareness.
	So, unfair from a lot of different perspectives.
	And as a matter of fact, as I briefly mentioned yesterday, this Algerian boxer had made some brutal blows against a Mexican female boxer, Brianda Tamara, in December of 2022.
	She said, her blows hurt me a lot, meaning the guy.
	I don't think I ever felt like that in my 13 years as a boxer, not even in my sparring with men.
	Thank God that I got out of the ring safely.
	He has claimed online that they have been excluded from matches.
	Again, they is his chosen pronoun.
	They are legion.
	Something in there. Ms.
	Payton's experience has led her to become an ambassador for Independent Women's Forum, which advocates for fairness in women's sports.
	A statement she gave to North Carolina Legislature last year was instrumental in its decision to pass an act in blocking transgender athletes from women's sports.
	So, the athlete who caused injuries posted on, wrote on her TikTok video, I literally hit her because she pulled off the net when she was supposed to be blocking, and she gave me an easy shot down the line.
	No remorse whatsoever about it.
	As a matter of fact, this is still a problem even with volleyball.
	And in Florida, it's caused a lot of problems in one particular high school that is down in Broward County.
	The Florida legislature passed a law that said you're not going to put men in women's sports.
	And in defiance of that, this high school did that, and the school board reassigned, I guess you can't fire anybody that has tenure or something, so they reassigned the principal and another administrator.
	But now the coach of that team has done it again, and has now gotten a suspension.
	And what the coach did was to put her son, who she says is now her daughter, We're good to go.
	She knew what the law was.
	She made a decision not to follow the law, and that needs to have a consequence to it, said a school board member.
	And again, this follows the Florida High School Athletic Association's investigation into that student's participation on the girls' team in December, which resulted in a $16,500 fine for the school.
	$500 for every game that the student participated in.
	The student was also barred from playing on any school team for a year.
	The school's principal and other staffers were removed from their positions and reassigned to non-school sites amid the investigation, prompting turmoil and outrage as students walked out in protest.
	You see, it's very deeply ingrained in the upcoming generations by these teachers.
	What were we ever thinking when we created these government-run schools?
	Seriously. Well, I know exactly what we were thinking.
	Conservatives thought they were going to use the government institutions to train kids to think the way they wanted them to think.
	What they didn't see was the fact that the institutions would be taken over by the left.
	They marched through these institutions.
	We will not tolerate any school that violates this law.
	We applaud the swift action taken by the Florida High School Athletic Association to ensure there are serious consequences for this illegal behavior.
	The coach is absolutely unrepentant.
	Again, already the coach who put in her daughter, she says it's her son that she now calls her daughter, Who did that, and the school got a $16,500 fine.
	The principal was reassigned to a non-school site and all the rest of the stuff.
	And she still, in defiance of all that, put her son in to play against girls in volleyball.
	And her response was that, you are outing my daughter.
	No, you're using your daughter, your son, as a daughter.
	And you're the one who is outing them.
	Florida is among at least 23 states that have passed laws barring transgender students.
	And again, the one that we just talked about who was injured, she was instrumental in getting that passed in North Carolina.
	And then we look at the green Potemkin village that's been built by these radical Marxists.
	The mayor of Paris, a radical Marxist who has, if you remember the yellow vest things, again, she has been at the center of all this stuff, at the forefront of it.
	No coincidence, I'm sure that the big Paris climate accord was held there in 2015 because she was doing her best to ban cars. That's why the people had the yellow vest things there She has been at the forefront of pushing the 15-minute cities It was somebody that was hired by her that came up with this idea and they started implementing it there And now in the Olympic Village It was long reported that they were not going to allow them
	to have air conditioning. So a lot of different countries were having their teams Bring air conditioning with them as I reported yesterday unable to clean up the Sane River they're continuing to dump raw sewage into it So what did you think was going to happen with E. coli?
	But again, very important to go back and look at that report.
	We separated it out yesterday because I wanted people to look at the difference.
	They have zero tolerance for anything that they don't like except for E. coli.
	There's going to be zero tolerance of any bird flu.
	There's going to be zero tolerance of CO2. There's going to be zero COVID and all the rest of this stuff.
	We've got net zero this and net zero that.
	But when it comes to something like E. coli and people swimming in it, they have a certain level that they'll tolerate.
	But they can't even get it down to that level with their policies.
	An Australian swimmer who has won gold and silver thus far, Slamming the ridiculous eco-friendly Olympic Village schemes said it probably cost me a record.
	Even though she won medals, she said I probably could have set a record with this.
	Ariane Titmuss won a gold medal for Australia in the women's 400 meter and silver in the 200 meter freestyle.
	Still, she says, the Paris organizers and their eco-friendly living conditions have been a disaster for athletes.
	She was discouraged on Sunday when she didn't break her own world record in the 400 meter.
	She said, living in the Olympic village makes it hard to perform.
	Several athletes have brutally blasted Olympic organizers for the so-called sustainable living quarters, which included polyethylene mattresses, cardboard beds, and no air conditioning.
	The plans for vegan meals forced many athletes to scramble for other food sources.
	This is total misery.
	Paris is one of these C40 cities.
	They don't want people to have air conditioning or meat or you name it.
	Australian swimming head coach even noted that the national team has shipped in better food and air conditioning units to make the athletes more comfortable as they train for their time in the spotlight.
	One teammate echoed the criticism and said, my back is about to fall off.
	After trying to sleep on the bed.
	There's multiple factors that make village life far from ideal.
	There will be many athletes across the two weeks of competition who miss out on a medal because they're unsettled by this new environment, he said.
	He said, we haven't seen this at an Olympic Games before.
	We haven't had this amount of complaints about a village in Olympics history.
	I joked last night about the amount of vegan options in the village that they're running out of meat.
	Well, an Australian heavyweight boxer has come out.
	He wanted lamb chops, but there's a maximum of two chops per person.
	This guy is six foot six, and he's a boxer, and they'll only give him two lamb chops.
	The poor living conditions are evidenced by the times that swimmers have achieved in Paris.
	They said the times are well short of world record marks because they're sleeping on cardboard beds.
	They said at the end of the day it's about who can overcome these setbacks, who can put these distractions aside.
	What this reminds me of, have you ever seen, and they've actually...
	I did a movie of it, the book Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut, you know, where they handicap people.
	I mean, this is what this is all about.
	This is what this green agenda is about.
	It's what the net zero program is all about.
	Just everything.
	Taking away air conditioning, our comforts, all of it.
	I mean, there's absolutely no reason why a cardboard bed is more to be desired even for their climate alarmism fantasies than a regular bed.
	Why can't you make it comfortable?
	I mean, it doesn't have emissions.
	They've got polyethylene things that they're using there.
	Those have emissions of some sort.
	They're made out of petroleum products or whatever.
	All of it is absolutely insane.
	Well, we're going to take a quick break and we will be right back.
	They're doing what in the place they named after me?
	Good thing I have the David Knight Show to keep me informed on the plots of these traitors.
	Making sense.
	Common again.
	This is The David Knight Show.
	Well, let's take a look at what we can do in terms of pushing back against this.
	And of course, a lot of it is at the local level.
	Tennessee City, the officials have unanimously embraced prayer.
	And they declare that God is the creator and king of all glory.
	And the atheists are really angry about this.
	And it's a group.
	This is a town, Mount Juliet.
	It's near Nashville, I believe.
	They passed a resolution calling the Lord the Creator and King of all glory and encouraged, that's the key word, encouraged citizens to embrace prayer if they are so willing.
	Oh, okay.
	Well, that's not like the way they ran the vaccines and stuff, right?
	Did you ever hear anybody say, you know, you need to get that vaccine.
	It's good. If you're willing to get it, you should get it.
	No, no. It was going to be coercion, other mandates like that.
	The effort undertaken by the city commissioners supports a Tennessee state resolution that called for July to be a month of prayer and fasting.
	The resolution says it calls for a time of prayer and fasting in the state.
	It names a number of issues the state is calling on citizens of the state of Tennessee to pray and fast about if they are so willing to do or inclined to do.
	This resolution is simply offering our support for that resolution.
	But the Freedom From Religion Foundation, an atheist activist group, Is upset about this.
	Is probably going to sue them.
	Do you notice something about their name?
	The freedom from religion?
	Not only is that not what the Constitution says, that is exactly the opposite of what the Constitution says.
	The Constitution is about the free exercise of religion.
	These people want freedom from religion.
	They want to shut down the free exercise of religion.
	They want to shut down the Constitution.
	It's not just unconstitutional.
	Their organization is anti-constitutional.
	And so, again, it is encouraging people to do something.
	It's not coercing them. It's not mandating them to do it.
	Religious proclamations, particularly those with references to Jesus Christ and a Christian Lord, are unnecessarily divisive, said the freedom from religion.
	If these counties don't rescind their own proclamations because we do represent atheists and agonists, is what he said.
	He means agnostics.
	Maybe that was a missed print, but it says agonists.
	They're agonizing over this, aren't they?
	What somebody else is doing.
	And if the government is unable to provide that, we'll have to see what the next steps are.
	Well, we'll have to see.
	Go for it. Let's have that fight.
	That is something that is absolutely worth pushing against.
	And of course, we've had these types of declarations throughout our history.
	From the Revolutionary War and after, to Civil War and after that, to World War II. Now, they do want to shut down our free exercise of religion.
	And as we're talking about the Constitution and the legal issues involved, Kim Davis again...
	I mentioned this briefly the other day.
	She is the clerk in Kentucky that refused to sign her name.
	She says, a violation of my religious beliefs, in the same way that it would be a violation of the religious beliefs of some of these doctors to have to be compelled to perform an abortion.
	And so she said, I'm not going to do it.
	She was subsequently dismissed.
	This was back in 2015.
	The Supreme Court's Obergefell ruling that forced all 50 states to recognize unions between members of the same sex.
	And again, when we go back to the Constitution, the Tenth Amendment says, powers, powers, not delegated, To the federal government are retained by the states or the people.
	And again, it's very important that the Constitution and the founders got that right.
	We don't have anything such as states' rights.
	States don't have rights.
	They understood that.
	And the founders would have never claimed that corporations have rights either.
	States are a creation of people.
	Corporations are a creation of the government.
	And human beings, on the other hand, are created by God and endowed with inalienable rights.
	And so that's the first distinction.
	The second is that when you look at what the Supreme Court did with Obergefell, what the Supreme Court did with Roe v.
	Wade was to deny the constitutions of the states and to deny the referenda that had been held in all the different states, even in California.
	They had a referendum to have homosexual marriage respected.
	And even with all the money from Apple Computer and Tim Cook, it lost even in California.
	So this was an unconstitutional usurpation of power by the federal government.
	And so now you have Liberty Counsel is taking this case to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
	Because they continued to come after, in a punitive way, after Kim Davis.
	She was ordered to pay $100,000 to one same-sex couple, in addition to losing her job.
	And so, they are going to take this case to the Sixth Circuit.
	They have a number of things that they're going to argue about.
	I was surprised that I didn't see the Tenth Amendment there.
	I mean, they were arguing about things like, well, the plaintiffs did not show that they were damaged sufficiently and things like that that I think are kind of side issues.
	They said the uproar, since we said we're going to take this case, has been staggering.
	And, of course, it is because in the Dobbs decision, I think it was Clarence Thomas who mentioned that this would have implications for things like Obergefell.
	Because they don't have the authority to define when life begins, and they don't have the authority to define what marriage is.
	That was not delegated to them.
	That's the essence of the issue.
	But I'm not sure that that's going to be what they focus on.
	They said our argument is straightforward.
	Bergerfeld should be overturned for the same reasons articulated by the court in the Dobbs decision that overturned abortion.
	As with Roe v. Wade, the activist high court at the time was wrong when Roe was decided, and it is wrong today because it is entirely based on the legal fiction of substantive due process, which lacks any basis in the Constitution.
	Then you have LifeSite News adding a paragraph, which, and I think they're wrong about this, They said as a practical matter, overturning Obergefell would not change the status quo for marriage.
	Ever since President Biden signed the so-called Respect for Marriage Act in December of 2023, federal law has codified Obergefell's denial of states' ability to recognize only male and female unions as marriage.
	But reversing the 2015 Supreme Court precedent would clear the way for states to set their own marriage laws again if...
	The Respect for Marriage Act is ever repealed.
	That's not true. See, by not focusing on the Tenth Amendment, if that's going to be their strategy, they have left themselves open for these other issues.
	And the same thing is true of the abortion issue.
	If you have...
	If the Supreme Court has said rightfully that they don't have the authority to make a decision about when life begins, and that belongs at the states and they're right under the Tenth Amendment. That power was never delegated to the Supreme Court, so the states retain the power to define when life begins. There's nothing in the Constitution about marriage.
	Therefore, the definition of marriage has been retained as a power of the states and of the people.
	And so, if it's not been delegated to the federal government, that means it's not been delegated to the President or to the Congress either.
	It's not just to the Supreme Court.
	And so, this whole Respect for Marriage Act is unconstitutional as well, for all the same reasons.
	They don't have the authority to define this, if you look at the Tenth Amendment.
	But again, they're looking at other issues with this, and I think if they look at other issues, it's going to...
	And really kill it in the end.
	And that's one of the reasons why you don't want to try to do the set abortion at a federal level with a law.
	Even many pro-life advocates have got that wrong.
	First of all, since it's not legal and not constitutional, you'll have states that will ignore any prohibitions.
	But of course you'll have the Republican-run conservative states will obey these prohibitions just like they're doing with this Marriage Act.
	Thank you for listening. Have a good day.
	Let me tell you, the David Knight Show you can listen to with your ears.
	You can even watch it by using your eyes.
	In fact, if you can hear me, That means you're listening to The David Knight Show right now.
	Yeah. Good job.
	And you want to know something else?

▲